Citroën C4 Picasso

[NLPRacing]

Autoblog-Link

Pretty nice looking "People Mover".

 

 

Why do we get this crappy thing:

 

When we could get this:

[NickF1011]

Well, the Galaxy is considerably smaller than the Freestar. I do agree that the Freestar's appearance leaves MUCH to be desired though. Good riddance to that steaming pile of dung. :fan:

[sa_seahawker]

Reminds me of those old GM Lumina/Silhouette/Tran Sport vans that looked like a door wedge! LOL

 

One of my sergeants had one when I was in the military. We called it the "Millenium Falcon" cuz the dash area was so huge! LMAO

[bec5150]

Ahh yes, the ole dustbuster. My parents had one, the Pontiac Trans-port complete with the white aluminum wheels and the beachball inflator in the back. Only car I knew that you could put two large pizzas on the dashboard. You had to use a gas station squeegie to was the INSIDE of the winshield.

[retro-man]

If style is corporate testosterone, then Ford has no balls. The GT and the Mustang are great, but that's a case of riding their ancestors' coattails - which is something a bit different than the "Bold Moves" that, so far, exist in name only. I have to agree - that Aerostar is about as exciting as canned stringbeans, and the Freestyle is barely any better. Funny, I'd like the Freestyle better if they called it (and styled it) the "Five Hundred Wagon".

[waymondospiff]

I wish Ford would quickly "American-ize" the S-Max and send it over here. Either as a Ford or Mercury. Volvo 2.4L 5-cyl standard with the 2.5L 5-cyl Turbo optional. Priced right (and don't talk to me about Euro-to-Dollar exchange rates...I don't care.) the S-Max could do well.

 

Tuned for mileage, the 2.4L should return 28-29mpg, like it does in the V70, and Ford would have a big PR splash here. Bold moves, eh? I'm waiting.

 

Scott

[Explorer4X4]

The Citroen is a piece of SH!T, it is gross and ugly. To hell with minivans and wagons. The last good minivan was the third generation Caravan. The last good wagon was the LTD Country Squire. What we need is the bold, sexy, stylish Ford Fairlane.

[ANTAUS]

If you look at the Windstar/Freestar, in it's time and era, it was actually good looking for what it was. Just read the lines around the car, they were nicely integrated, and in harmony. It's just now minivans have taken more of a styling emphansize, as it has been in Europe for awhile. Although risky considering the Quest as one example.

 

The S-Max does look a bit attractive in a sport way, although that "A" Pillar window reminds me of the Aerostar. I just have a beef with those types of senseless pieces of glass. If you look at the rest of that car and remove some of the styling elements, it's really pretty basic and plain.

 

My main beef with the Wind/Freestar were the lack of reliability, the OHV engines, and crappy transmissions.

 

Ford last attempt sharpened up the quality and styling a bit, although changes in the exterior weren't enough to offset the bad aura it gained through time. R.I.P., Bring in the Fairlane !

 

And please, dont call it the FairStar... Kill this star s--t, we are on Earth !

[Explorer4X4]

The current Freestar is boring. But the Windstar is awsome looking! It looks good even for today! The Windstar Limited was the best damn minivan of it's time! Our neighbors had a Limited (and an Oldsmobile Bravada and Mercedes-Benz Gl-Class), power doors and rear entertainment system. It never had a probem. It was a lease, so they lost it. The liked it so much, their next car is going to be a Freestar limited and a Expedition King Ranch.

[156n3rd]

The Citroen is a piece of SH!T, it is gross and ugly. To hell with minivans and wagons. The last good minivan was the third generation Caravan. The last good wagon was the LTD Country Squire. What we need is the bold, sexy, stylish Ford Fairlane.

 

Right, and the Tempo was a state of the art vehicle in it's day and it was voted most likely to die of ugliness. Okay, I'm just jerking yer chain, I once thought my '88 Aerostar was a thing of beauty. I love the French mini, not the French.

Edited August 5, 2006 by 156n3rd

[Roadrunner]

<< If you look at the Windstar/Freestar, in it's time and era, it was actually good looking for what it was. Just read the lines around the car, they were nicely integrated, and in harmony. >>

 

Actually, regarding the Windstar, I think you're right. Its exterior looked good 10 years ago when it was on the market.

 

The Freestar was a step in the wrong direction, but oh well.

[Edgey]

The Windstar looked good? I don't believe that was ever the case.

 

The Villager was a good looking minivan for its time. Even today the Villager looks reletively attractrive in the minivan world.

 

Has anybody noticed just how long-lived those Villgers are? I see quite a few of them still tooling around, even if they've been beat to hell. The Windstar on the other hand has been nearly erradicated from the planet due to their 'problems'.

Edited August 5, 2006 by Edgey

[156n3rd]

My ex drives a '95 Villager which just keeps on running with over 100,000 on it. It was an okay looking unit. For my money the Windstar did things well. Under the right conditions, it seemed to be a cut above DCX units. Then, Freestar came along and they lost me. I just can't understand their way of thinking. At least Europeans make people movers that push the envelope, something we are not accustomed to here. The may not be the prettiest girl at the dance, but they a heart and aren't afraid to step out.

[one2gamble]

ive been spotting the mazda 5 all over the place lately

[sa_seahawker]

Right, and the Tempo was a state of the art vehicle in it's day and it was voted most likely to die of ugliness.

 

Didn't they make a 'SPORT' package for that thing that was supposed to motivate me to go out there and purchase this awesomely sporty coupe??? Before there was ricers....there were the temposers and topazanese!!!! LMAO :lol:

 

And don't forget about the Mercury Lynx!!! My, we've come a LONG way.

 

OOOHHH, wait that car that souned like an acronym like the M4ATI, or something. Or maybe that was only sold in Europe as a European Taurus?

Edited August 6, 2006 by sa_seahawker

[ebritt]

The Windstar looked good? I don't believe that was ever the case.

 

The Villager was a good looking minivan for its time. Even today the Villager looks reletively attractrive in the minivan world.

 

Has anybody noticed just how long-lived those Villgers are? I see quite a few of them still tooling around, even if they've been beat to hell. The Windstar on the other hand has been nearly erradicated from the planet due to their 'problems'.

It lived so long because it wasn't a Ford, it was a nissan quest rebadged. It was good for 250,000 to 300,000 miles.

[Explorer4X4]

The Villager was good looking? I thought I'd heard it all. That peice of junk was the worst looking minivan! The Windstar and third generation Caravans were the only decent looking minivans.

 

Has anyone owned a Tempo? Also, they were rated higher then the Chevy Corsica and Dodge Aries. They made a sport Tempo and Topaz. The Tempo GLS had a standard 3.0L Vulcan V6 which gave a top speed of about 150MPh, with records of 125MPH. Black leather was an interior choice. No other entry-level car of the Tempo's time offered standard AWD you know.

 

 

 

Also, with the "lasting longest" thing, no other company but Ford has had best selling vehicles for over 40 years. The Ford F-Series, Mustang and Econoline/E-Series have been alive and well for over 40 years.

[CurtisH]

Has anyone owned a Tempo? Also, they were rated higher then the Chevy Corsica and Dodge Aries. They made a sport Tempo and Topaz. The Tempo GLS had a standard 3.0L Vulcan V6 which gave a top speed of about 150MPh, with records of 125MPH. Black leather was an interior choice. No other entry-level car of the Tempo's time offered standard AWD you know.

I owned an '87 Topaz. Only had 64,000 miles on it when I traded it for a Ranger. It was in the shop so much, I could not wait to get rid of it.

 

Oh, I find it hard to believe that anything with a Vulcan V6 could reach 150 mph.

[Hellcat_F6F]

I owned an '87 Topaz. Only had 64,000 miles on it when I traded it for a Ranger. It was in the shop so much, I could not wait to get rid of it.

 

Oh, I find it hard to believe that anything with a Vulcan V6 could reach 150 mph.

 

I had an '86 Topaz, 2.3 automatic..bought it w/ 150,000, sold it w/ 210,000..as of 3 years ago it was still running around. I can't vouch for a 3.0 hitting 150 mph, but I know my 2.3 would do over 100, lol.

[Explorer4X4]

I meant, the V6 could reach 120MPH. Also, you can tell CurtisH sucks at taking car of cars.

[waymondospiff]

The Villager was good looking? I thought I'd heard it all. That peice of junk was the worst looking minivan! The Windstar and third generation Caravans were the only decent looking minivans.

 

Has anyone owned a Tempo? Also, they were rated higher then the Chevy Corsica and Dodge Aries. They made a sport Tempo and Topaz. The Tempo GLS had a standard 3.0L Vulcan V6 which gave a top speed of about 150MPh, with records of 125MPH. Black leather was an interior choice. No other entry-level car of the Tempo's time offered standard AWD you know.

 

The Villager/Quest had some problems, I believe electrical issues, in the early model years, 93-94. But since then I believe they were relatively trouble-free and have been running well for 10+ years now. Especially the 1999-2003 models. They weren't "best-in-class" but they've been reliable. Looks? Not a fan of the Villager/Quest or Windstar. I think the Freestar is classically handsome with its broad, simple lines. Especially the Monterrey in black. Not bad. And speaking of junk, the 1996-2000 Caravan. I can't tell you the people I knew with these vans (I owned a 2000, parents had a 1999, Aunt has a 1999, I was in high school when these launched so many friends' parents owned these...) and they are truly junk. Something will always cost money every three months. Whether it be the too small brakes which need to be machined roughly every year, faulty electronics, various interior rattles, a/c compressors failing, etc. Great design, lousy execution. Which pretty much describes all mid-90s Chryslers.

 

And the Tempo. No, never owned one. But had a girlfriend with one. Very reliable. Plain as the day is long, however. A couple of points: black leather...ummm, many cars had black leather available; the optional V6 was only available in 1992-94, the 98/100hp 2.3L wasn't likely to set any speed records; many cars both higher and lower priced offered AWD: Subaru Justy/Loyale/Legacy, Toyota Corolla, Pontiac 6000, and many others. And AWD was cancelled in '92, the same year the V6 option would have made the AWD model something of a budget SUV.

 

Not to take away from the Tempo: it sold very well in it's peak years. It was a high-quality piece, sometimes outscoring the Accord/Camry in JD Power. It was the first "modern" car to offer an airbag since the mid-70s GMs. And as you said, it outscored the Aries (I'll take your word on the Corsica.) But there is no way to say that by 1992, when the Tempo was entering its ninth model year, that the all-new Camry wasn't simply a better car. And Ford started to loose momentum with its "junior" midsize car. Thankfully, the best-selling Taurus covered for the Tempo...until 1997...and we can all write the rest of the story from there.

 

Scott

Edited August 7, 2006 by waymondospiff

[CurtisH]

I meant, the V6 could reach 120MPH. Also, you can tell CurtisH sucks at taking car of cars.

My message reveals nothing about my ability to take care of cars. My Topaz had one mechanical failure and 4 electrical/electronic failures in 4 and a half years. None of these failures were related to maintenance issues. Reliability was better in the later model years. However, I would never have been interested in buying another one. Even without the reliability problems, it would have only been "adequate transporation".

[Explorer4X4]

The Toyota Camry wasn't much better. In 1983-1986, it was square and blocky compared to the Tempo. Engines were the 2.0L 2S-E and 2.0L 14 diesel, while the Tempo had a 2.3 and 2.0 diesel. The second generation (still slower then the Tempo, and lasted from 1987 to 1991) had a square front end, a 1.8L 14, a 2.0L 3S-FE and a (optional, compared to the standard V6 in the Tempo) 2.5L 2VZ-FE V6 . Also, AWD was OPTIONAL on the Camry, Tempo had it standard. The Tempo always offered more choice, the Camry had 3 trim levels and the Tempo had 5 (and Topaz 6). The third generation (1992-1996) was more aerodynamic then the Tempo and more expensive. This new generation had a 2.2L I4 and a 3.0L V6. Same as the Tempo, but the Tempo offered a 2.0L Mazda 4-cylinder diesel, a 2.3L SHO 4-cylinder and a 3.0L Vulcan V6.

 

Also, this "all new" Camry is ages older then the Tempo. It was introduced in 1980. And the Tempo'd most popular year was in 1992, with the addition of standard V6 power. Also, no other car offered STANDARD All Wheel Drive, or a standard V6.

 

I would buy 20 or more Tempos, wonderful cars. I must admit, the first generation Tempo wasn't the best, but other cars had worse problems. But I'd a bad Tempo anyday.

 

 

On the topic of the Freestar. I find all of Ford's vans good lookings. The modest and kind looking Aerostar (which looked better then the GM Wedge Heads and Mopar 4-eyes), the sexy, cool and chrome-laden Windstars (which made the first cool minivan) and the family-friendly Freestar.

 

Also, the Freestar offers interesting features like a dash-board container, compact trash holders in the middle row, 5-star crash test ratings and fold-flat seats.

[waymondospiff]

Wow. I can't believe I'm debating the merits of the Ford Tempo. But so be it.

 

The Toyota Camry wasn't much better. In 1983-1986, it was square and blocky compared to the Tempo. Engines were the 2.0L 2S-E and 2.0L 14 diesel, while the Tempo had a 2.3 and 2.0 diesel. The second generation (still slower then the Tempo, and lasted from 1987 to 1991) had a square front end, a 1.8L 14, a 2.0L 3S-FE and a (optional, compared to the standard V6 in the Tempo) 2.5L 2VZ-FE V6 . Also, AWD was OPTIONAL on the Camry, Tempo had it standard. The Tempo always offered more choice, the Camry had 3 trim levels and the Tempo had 5 (and Topaz 6). The third generation (1992-1996) was more aerodynamic then the Tempo and more expensive. This new generation had a 2.2L I4 and a 3.0L V6. Same as the Tempo, but the Tempo offered a 2.0L Mazda 4-cylinder diesel, a 2.3L SHO 4-cylinder and a 3.0L Vulcan V6.

 

Your timing on engine options is incorrect. The Tempo offered three engines:

2.0L Diesel available 1984-1986

2.3L I-4 Gas available 1984-1994

3.0L V6 Gas available 1992-1994

 

So, during the Camry's 1987-1991 run, the V6, available only from 1988 on, was much faster than the 2.3L Tempo. Also, the 2.0L Camry put out 116hp vs. 98/100hp for the 2.3L Tempo. Combined with a four-speed auto in the Camry versus a three-speed auto in the Tempo, the Camry would have at least kept up if not outrun the Tempo.

 

And then in 1992, when the Tempo first offered a V6, it was the 130hp Vulcan. The 1992 Camry 2.2L put out 130hp, the 3.0L V6 185hp.

 

Also, this "all new" Camry is ages older then the Tempo. It was introduced in 1980. And the Tempo'd most popular year was in 1992, with the addition of standard V6 power. Also, no other car offered STANDARD All Wheel Drive, or a standard V6.

 

And neither did the Tempo. AWD wasn't any more "standard" on the Tempo than it was on the Camry. AWD was optional on both the Camry & the Tempo. Both Camry & Tempo had AWD listed as a separate model and both were available in a STANDARD FWD model.

 

Also, the Tempo was only available with a V6 from 1992 to 1994. And again, that V6 powerplant was optional on the GL & LX, standard only on the high-end GLS. The Camry had a similar model layout of LE, LE V6, XLE, & XLE V6.

 

Plus the AWD Tempo was dropped after 1991. The V6 wasn't available until 1992. And neither feature was standard. Okay class: how many Tempos with standard V6s & AWD were made? And for extra credit, how many Tempos were made with a V6 and AWD total? Answer for both, ZERO.

 

And the Camry of 1983 was an all-new design. It was on a unique, FWD chassis vs. the RWD Celica chassis of the 1980 Camry (and the earlier Corona.) The 1987 Camry was an overhaul of that same chassis. The 1992 was all-new again, with the 1997 Camry being a revamp of that chassis. See a pattern? The Tempo rode its Escort-based (That'd be 1981, not that we're counting.) chassis without a significant redesign for it's full ELEVEN year run.

 

I would buy 20 or more Tempos, wonderful cars. I must admit, the first generation Tempo wasn't the best, but other cars had worse problems. But I'd a bad Tempo anyday.

 

Good for you. The Tempo was a fine auto, in it's day, but by the end of the ELEVEN model year run, it was simply out-classed, out-powered, out-refined, and out-gunned by the competition. Minus the Chevy Corsica & Dodge Spirit. Hmm...sounds a lot like today when the domestic cars are trumped by the foreign competition. At least the domestics are catching up and even passing some now.

 

Also, the Freestar offers interesting features like a dash-board container, compact trash holders in the middle row, 5-star crash test ratings and fold-flat seats.

 

Now I know for sure you're pulling my chain. Dash-board container? Fold-flat SEAT, not seats, as only one folds into the floor. The Freestar & Monterey are attractively styled, but in every other regard are way, way, way out-done by the Honda & Toyota models. I'd even say the Chryslers and bizzarre-o Nissan are much better. Even Kia & Hyundai show up the Fords now. About the only vans the Freestar beats, or at least ties, are the GM quadruplets.

 

Seriously.

 

Scott

[156n3rd]

The Villager was good looking? I thought I'd heard it all. That peice of junk was the worst looking minivan! The Windstar and third generation Caravans were the only decent looking minivans.

 

Has anyone owned a Tempo? Also, they were rated higher then the Chevy Corsica and Dodge Aries. They made a sport Tempo and Topaz. The Tempo GLS had a standard 3.0L Vulcan V6 which gave a top speed of about 150MPh, with records of 125MPH. Black leather was an interior choice. No other entry-level car of the Tempo's time offered standard AWD you know.

Also, with the "lasting longest" thing, no other company but Ford has had best selling vehicles for over 40 years. The Ford F-Series, Mustang and Econoline/E-Series have been alive and well for over 40 years.

 

I disagree with your assesments. The Lumina was one of the, if not THE ugliest mini-van ever. Can't say I've ever owned a Tempo. They turned me off as being lil' Taurus wannabes. I know, The Tempo came first, but it was quite a poorly built car as you compare it to the Corsica and Aries. More junk from the '80's.