Weakest car you ever owned

[FordManBrad]

Our worst was an '81 Granada with the 200 I-6 and a 1 bbl carb. Took it on vacation in the mountains and it went like 15 mph up the hills. Ran like crap too.

 

Not far behind was an '85 LTD with the 3.8 V-6, a 2 bbl carb and a mile of vacuum hoses. Also, ran like crap and hated to run at all in damp weather. That was the final new Ford we bought with a carb. Good riddance.

 

In addition to the lack of power, they both blew their heater cores and sprayed antifreeze out of the defroster.

 

Contrast to one of the best which was an '88 T-Bird with 3.8 V-6 and multi port injection. Seemed alot faster and ran perfect for an amazing 205,000 miles. I was forever sold on EFI after that!

Edited August 26, 2009 by FordManBrad

[fordmantpw]

My how times have changed. We forget how good we have it now listening to folks complain about family cars with power everything, A/C, more electronic gadgets than you can shake a stick at and safety items galore taking more than 7 seconds to reach 60 MPH.

[Patate]

Mine:

 

2000 Chrysler Cirrus 2.4L 150 hp... enough power to drive "fast".

 

What?? it is the weakest car I have owned.

 

Since I'm a kid, I can't say I drove those early 80s cars.

 

I have owned a 95 Voyager 3.3L (170hp I think, but lots of torque), the 2000 Cirrus, and the 2009 Malibu (170 hp)

 

I never owned a "weak" car, but also never owner (or drove) a fast car.

[Sixt9coug]

Our worst was an '81 Granada with the 200 I-6 and a 1 bbl carb. Took it on vacation in the mountains and it went like 15 mph up the hills. Ran like crap too.

 

 

LOL GUESS WHAT CAR IM BUYING THIS WEEKEND? lol..... 68K miles, working AC and runs like new. Its for my sister. Not bad for $800 though.

[Mustang_Marty]

70 Pinto w/ a 200k mile 2.0 Automatic that I purchased for $100 back in 1984. I added a qt of 85w/90 gear oil to keep the compression up. That car was a dog.

 

I currently own a 79 Mustang coupe with the factory turbo 4. It only has 95k miles on it, but it is a gutless wonder. A V8 may be in it's future.

[matthewq4b]

83 Ford LTD (About 3100 LBS dry) 2.3L 4 banger Factory Propane Auto tranny

 

The gasser was rated at 88hp Ford did not even release the HP figures for the propane job it must have been about 70hp.

 

 

When the was car cold you dropped it in gear mashed the pedal to the floor and waited, about 8 seconds later it would start to move 0-60 on level ground only....eventually, top speed on level ground with a good tail wind 75 MPH. add 4 adults and there was no way you were getting to 60 MPH unles it was going down hill.

Small hills on the hyway ( I live in praries so we are taking real small) were a 55 MPH affair if you took a run at them. Fail to to do that and you were doing 45mph or less by the time you hit the top.

 

The only advatage was in the mid 90's it cost $10 to fill and that took you over 740 miles. And it pumped out heat like no body's buisness even in -40

 

Matthew

Edited August 20, 2009 by matthewq4b

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Gutless weak underpowered 1959 Morris Mini roller skate my first car proved to me at a an early FWD is shit incapable of putting any power through its drive, engine squashed into a sardine tin making DIY maintenance a nightmare.

 

You could not fit much more than 1 loaf of bread in its rear boot, all though latter Mini moved the battery out of the rear boot which meant you could fit 2 loafs of bread in it.

 

On the motorway highway the underpowered FWD junk was soooooooh noisy at high revs it made you fillings in your teeth fall out, you needed ear defenders to stop you going deaf, if the cramped cabin didnot get to you first with pins and needles.

 

Morris Mini's Lucas electric fuel pump was at the lowest point in the fuel system right next to the rear wheel so it was a perfect water trap, the inlet/outlet valves stuck closed everytime the temperature dropped below zero or it snowed, a quick light tap with a hammer was all that was needed to free them up. I used to do a regular long 120 mile trip home from work, l once had to do it in the snow that meant stopping a few times because the fuel pump was running intermittently and caked in 10" of snow under the rear wheel arch, l finally moved it into the warmer and higher position in the engine bay which cured the problem. But l spend more time under the bonnet/hood of Mini than driving it, with a problem list longer than 4 pages of BON postings over the six months peroid of ownership..

 

Next car was a RWD Ford Escort Mk1 with a super smooth gearbox which was a Godsend after the Mini's which was a bit of hit of miss affair trying to find a gear like all British Leyland cars had at the time. Engine was quiet relaxed not overstessed like the Mini's and it had no feel/feedback from the front wheels though the steering like you got from the Mini that was also more relaxing. I used the Escort for another two and half years on my regular 120 mile trip to Filton near Bristol with very little to do at weekends other than routine maintenace. FWD VW Golf was also a hyped up load of shit that l once owned, Peugeot 205 GTI is the only FWD car that was any good that l have driven but not owned, but Peugeot have always made the best handling FWD cars and best diesel cars in the world, l am glad Ford share their diesel engines with them.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Ford Jellymoulds

[BrewfanGRB]

The weakest car I ever "owned" was the Pontiac LeMans (it was a little door thing built in Korea, not one from the early 80s that was more of a midsize 4 door).

 

I don't really know what the stats were (I should look them up)...but it was very slow and the buzz! Oh my gosh, it was very buzzy under acceleration (and at WOT, forget it!). It creaked, rattled and squeaked everywhere. What was my mom thinking!

 

The one car you'd think would have been the weakest (76 Ford Granada) was actually pretty awesome. It was a beast--blew lots of hot air in the coldest winter and was pretty damn fast! Of course, it had no power brakes, no a/c, no real radio. But you could drop in drive and tromp the gas...

[lfeg]

82 Chevy Impala company car. 4.4 liter V8, 3 speed auto. Spent alot of time in 2nd gear driving around SE Ohio and West Virginia. After it was totaled in a rear ender, I was offered a choice of 2 84 Impalas sitting at a local dealer, one with a 229 V6, 3 speed auto and the other with the police package and a 305 V8 / 4 speed auto. The V6 was worse than the 82. I drove the police package unit 3500 to 4000 miles a month for the next 2 years.

Edited August 20, 2009 by lfeg

[lfeg]

Hey, check this out-

 

Motor Trend

 

They are really up to speed! And I quote... "Specification Data Coming Soon

We are currently still collecting latest 1982 Chevrolet Impala specification data. Please check back soon for updated data. "

 

I couldn't help it. 27 years later, they are still collecting data on the 82 Impala.

[OHV 16V]

Got you all: 1986 Chevrolet Sprint, 1.0-liter 3-cylinder, 53 hp, 3-speed automatic. :P

[Tornado]

My first car, 1985 Dodge Daytona 2.2L. I don't know what was wrong with it but I clocked it twice, 0-60 in 33seconds :o

[harddrive747]

My first car, 1985 Dodge Daytona 2.2L. I don't know what was wrong with it but I clocked it twice, 0-60 in 33seconds :o

 

My family owned a 1970 VW Beetle with 4 on the floor and manual steering and brakes. The original one, not this new version. It went through 4 people before it got to me. Discovered that it was running on 3 cylinders and running at 60 mph the engine was turning over 3000 RPM. It would go, but didn't move very fast.

 

Then I owned a 1982 Chevrolet Cavilier with a 2.0 4 cylinder and 5 speed manual. It would do pretty good, but still was slow.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

My cars are familiar ones from this list.

 

The worst car I have ever had the displeasure of driving was the old fairmont wagon that I got from my parents. It had no A/C, no heat (the heater core kept springing leaks, after three replacements, we gave up and bypassed it at the firewall), no power windows or door locks, I don't even think the brakes were particularly well boosted and there was definitely no power steering. The radio had been stolen from the previous owners so there was a hole in the dash where it was supposed to be. It had the 200 I6, but hte number 1 cylinder had lost some compression and had an oil leak that would regularly foul the plug. It did 0-60 in about a day when we first got it. My dad and I did some work on the I-6 and pulled off all the power sucking emissions gear and retuned it and it only took half a day to get to 60. Eventually, the hydraulic line for the rear drum brakes failed and sprayed brake fluid all over the floor of the back seat, so I had to rerun that brake line. Eventually, this became a project car and saw a LOT of changes (and mustang parts)...

 

The second worst car I ever had was the 93 Ford Tempo GL 4 cylinder. Supposedly 90-something horsepower, but those were THE weakest horses I've ever had the displeasure of marshaling around. You planned EVERYTHING in advance as there was a delay in throttle response (mash throttle, count to two, and power arrives). EVERYTHING on the car broke at least once while I had it. It leaked oil from several spots. Eventually, I was putting so much money into it for regular repairs that I figured that I could own a real vehicle for the same expense, so I bought an F-150.

 

The third was the one I owned for the shortest amount of time. The 85 LTD with the 3.8L TBI engine. It did have power everything, so I can't complain about that. But where it didn't have power was under the hood. It had decent torque off the line, but ran out of breath in a hurry. The engine was near impossible to tune well as the TBI system fought everything that you did to it. Eventually, a delivery van shortened the vehicle by 4 feet and it was no longer my problem.

[6t5frlane]

Ok, I have too much time on my hands but I double dare anybody to come up with a weaker vehicle.

 

I had a 80 Oldsmobile Cutlass with a 260 cid V8 that had 105 hp and did the quarter in the low 20 second range. My 89 S10 with a 2.5 Iron duke was faster and that is no joke. I think the olds had a 2.29 rear end as well and that didnt help. To top it off it was not good on gas either and was basically a POS. Pretty sure this car had the infamous Turbo 200 tranny that was a POS. This one did not fail because it had zero power going to it.

 

This was back in the day when GM had different engines for different divisions. This was a Oldsmobile motor and it was a smooth as butter but literally would not get out of its own way. Anybody else own one of these things or anything worse?

 

 

Me too. Had a 78 Cutlass with a 260. Scary slow

[Devodev]

Me too. Had a 78 Cutlass with a 260. Scary slow

 

Wow, as soon as I saw the thread topic and before reading the first post, I thought about the car that we called: The Bomb!

 

1980 Cultass my dad picked up for $50. The folks had the nerve to have duals on the car. After all these years I thought it was just our particular car that was that slow, glad to know it was all of those stinking things!

[buddysystem]

There's some weak ones here but I think I may have you, 1973 Chevy Vega with 125k miles back in the early 80s in college. What a POS. Paid $40 for it. Needed starter fluid to get it going every day and it had to warm up for 15 minutes or it would stall when you put it in gear. I ended up trading it for a couple cases of beer after using it for the year. :shades:

[BORG]

Wow, these are great horror stories! I've never owned a car I didn't love, neither did my family growing up. My Dad said that the worst car he ever owned was the 1982 Ford Thunderbird, it was ugly and road like crap.

 

My weakest car was a 1996 Taurus GL, which was bought used at 100,000 miles. It moved pretty good and drove great so I can't complain, but it was wearing out and that meant the car always found somethign else to break as soon as a I fixed the one before it, which made life hard as a poor college student (most went un-serviced). At 135,000 miles, the transmission started to show symptoms when it would clunk hard on 2nd, and the heater core must have been leaking because it would fog the windows. God I don't miss old cars It was still out there until 2007 when it was scrapped at 185,000 miles. Not bad! It was hard trading her in regardless of the headaches, but I got a new Lincoln LS out of it

Edited August 21, 2009 by BORG

[notquitesane]

For me, it would most definitely be the 1988 Mustang 2.3L auto that my parents bought me. That thing couldn't even spin tires on gravel...

[roush235]

Several responses have listed late 70's - early 80's Fords with straight sixes. I can attest to their "dogginess", as I have an original owner 79 Mustang with the 200 CID straight six. The car is restored to stock condition and gets its share of attention at local and national shows, but it indeed is extremely slow. And yes, it has never run good either.... it's always had a stumble at 1200 rpm, sometimes bad, sometimes not so bad (depending on how tuned-up it is), and always worse when it is halfways warmed up.

 

Someone once told me the engineers of the era never were able to get this engine to behave with all the smog equipment hung on it.

 

My car is great for nostalgia, but today's cars sure are leaps and bounds better as to driveability, economy, power, and durability.

[RichardJensen]

I really don't have a dog in this fight (can I still say that, post Vick?).

 

I had a '92 Tempo that wasn't great, but it wasn't anything like this.

 

Did have a friend who had an old Volvo that needed to be filled with 100+ octane out at the airport, or else it ran terribly and got awful fuel economy.

 

Another friend (she was roommates with the girl who owned the Volvo) drove out to visit my family and, on the way out, basically ran the car out of oil. My dad checked the dipstick three, four times, and it came out dry as a bone. That car died on I-90 a while later. It was yellow and I have no other recollection whatsoever about it.

 

Heck, it may not have even been yellow.

 

--

 

I did once drive another friend's early 80s Escort--first time I'd ever driven a car with a carb. Took me a while to figure out why it wouldn't start without pressing the gas pedal.

[joihan777]

1978 Buick Century. Beige.

 

0-60 time? Even getting TO 60mph depended on the wind!

[old_fairmont_wagon]

The inline sixes of that era for Ford, especially the cheap ones (the non-tuned 200 CIDs) suffered from very poor fuel/air distribution. With that one long intake manifold, the inner two cylinders always ran rich, the outer two always ran lean, and it hated the cold. I saw a modification for one of them, or it could have been an imported australian 250 cid I-6, but instead of having the one, long, cast intake, it appeard to have a custom made one that had three, one barrel carbs on it. Each one was between two cylinders (1,carb,2,3,carb,4,5,carb,6). I wasn't able to talk to the owner, but I did see it make a few impressive passes on a drag strip. It could definitely get out of its own way.

 

The issue there was largely fixed in the mid-80s with port fuel injection. The late (4th) edition 300 (4.9L) I-6s had PFI (it was a late add onas the first ones had carbs) and started and ran very well because of it. The engine was definitely tuned for torque though and, as a result, had a very poor peak HP number. There are actually performance parts for it that makes it a substantial performer with proper gearing. See the wikipedia page for more information...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Straight-6_engine#200

[chiefstang]

I got here late and didn't read page two, but I'm sure I have a frontrunner. My '69 Beetle had 49 HP when it was brand new, but this one was far from brand new. I took a couple of minutes to get to 60 mph regardless of wind conditions. If it was uphill, it would only hold speed in second gear (about 45 mph).

 

The distributer points would foul out every 300 miles or so, leaving me stranded, usually on the side of the highway... At night (the convenient part about rear engine was using the other car's headlights to clean the points).

 

The good news was, 60 mph felt like 160 mph. Unfortunately it was still 60...

 

The car was fun to drive for about a week, and then not so much. Especially in the winter with it's legendary Beetle heater.

 

Plus, it just felt like everybody wanted to beat me up all the time...

Edited August 21, 2009 by chiefstang

[fordtech1]

Mine had to be hands down the 84 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 (little cherokee) with a 2.8 V6 Carburated and a Chrysler 3 speed auto. It was so slow and drank gas because the gas pedal was always to the floor to keep up with traffic and at 65mph it was screaming. Runner up was a 85 Honda Accord 5speed Carburated. But it was a racer compared to the jeep.