Going for the trifecta… (yeah I know, it’s not really a trifecta…)
What do you think are the most overhyped cars?
I’ll make some nominations:
Honda Civic - expensive, slow, ugly, uncomfortable, expensive, unreliable (in my experience), too small, and with that size and price tag it should get 80MPG not 30. Did I mention expensive? The only good thing about that Kia-wannabe is that they’re so overhyped you could probably sell it for about as much as you bought it for when you realize it isn’t for you.
Ford Explorer - expensive, slow, ugly, unreliable, rolls over and kills grandma. If you want to go off roading, get a Wrangler. If you want to drive kids to the mall get a minivan or a Grand Cherokee or something like that.
VW Beetle - it’s reliable, but overpriced, not too slow, but the handling’s odd. However, it is indeed a car that looks like a bee stung an Audi TT and the swelling just won’t go down. The back seat is useless for grown males unless you like your head crammed against the ceiling. But mainly I dislike it because it’s an eyesore, a very popular eyesore.
Chevrolet Corvette - a friend of mine just had to have a 2001 Z06. It’s expensive and uncomfortable. A friend’s husband used to own a C5. It was in the shop more than on the road.
Ugly? Name a good looking post-2000 midsize-or-smaller car… guaranteed you won’t be able to. This is how cars look nowadays. They’ll be forced to as long as we insist on stupid pedestrian-impact rules and the automakers keep the motor up front. If we could get away with low noses once again maybe they’d look better.
Uncomfortable? The Civic’s seats are sized for someone who’s smaller than the average American male - specifically, someone who isn’t as broad in the beam. The problem is that Honda actually intends its cars to be driven and as a consequence designs seats that hold the driver in place. Seating’s always gonna be a compromise. If a 5’11", 145 lb race driver fits, a 5’11", 250 lb fullback isn’t, unfortunately. If you don’t fit, there are many different seats on the market, ranging from $140 to $1400.
Unreliable? Hmm… The Civic’s never been below “average” in the Consumer Reports study. I’ve got an old CRX with 175000 miles on it and I’ll be quite disappointed if I don’t get another 100k out of it. Motors are absolutely dead reliable as long as you keep oil and coolant in them. Transmissions are all but invincible. The clutches last 150k plus. The brakes suck and should be replaced at 1 mile but will last 40,000. The steering and suspension components don’t seem to give trouble that’s out of line with everything else. Honda electronics don’t seem to fail as often as anyone else’s does. It’s very rare to see wierd warning lights on in a Honda and everything still usually works after a decade.
Too small? I’ve got the opposite criticism. The new Civic and the one before it are way too big and heavy. A '99-00 Si should be able to run rings around the newer stuff for just that reason. Five people fit in the '92-95 car just fine. Why should a car be bigger?
Hondas usually beat the EPA mileage on the road. The plural of “anecdote” isn’t “data”, of course, but I don’t have any counterexamples to my statement. My CRX gets 46 MPG with an EPA highway rating of 39; my father’s Civic Si gets 30 in the city, 40 on the highway despite a 26/31 rating.
“Kia-Wannabe”? Where’d that come from? Have you driven a Civic or a Kia? The Civic is sporty, tightly sprung, responsive, and light at the controls. A Kia Spectra is a little less precise and agile than a Chevette.
If you’re criticizing a Corvette–much less a Z06, a veritable track car you can drive on the street–for being uncomfortable, you probably aren’t the target market. The taut suspension tuning required for agility and road-feel are going to make highway cruising choppy; it’s a compromise performance enthusiasts are looking for. Many people who buy sports cars because they want the look and feel of a sports car might be better served by one of the many sporty-looking cars that are really just dressed-up luxury cars: the Lexus SC430 for instance.
A C5 Corvette Z06 is my next car. It’s expensive, of course, and the stock seats should be thrown away, but there are plenty of reasons people buy these cars…
First and foremost is that it’s a TREMENDOUSLY fast car. I don’t think most people understand just how fast a Corvette actually is. At the end of a standing start quarter mile, a C5 Corvette Z06 will be almost 200 yards ahead of a Malibu. It’ll exceed 100 miles per hour on a typical freeway on-ramp. If you leave the throttle all the way on the floor, it will cover a mile every 21 seconds. Unless you spend Viper/911 Turbo money on a car, there is no stock car that will not get annhilated by a Z06. An Elise can stay with it for about 100 feet; anything else goes into the rearview mirror immediately and stays there.
Second is that the steering is very precise, very quick, and is backed up by some seriously big tires. A Corvette will outcorner any car on the road except a Lotus Elise. It feels a lot like a Miata does, only with a bit more grip… There isn’t much magic behind making a car handle well. Make sure it’s not overly heavy (check), put more weight on the rear tires than the fronts (check), keep the center of gravity very low (check), and make sure there’s enough tire area to keep the contact patch regular in shape (check). It doesn’t isolate you from the road much. It’s a sportscar. It isn’t supposed to.
Third, it’s not an overly impractical car to own. Insurance premiums are cheaper than those for a Honda CRX or a Toyota Celica, and on par with Camaro/Mustang rates. A manual-transmission example gets around 20 MPG in the city and around 30 on the highway. Maintenence costs are greater than a Civic but not more than any other $30-50k car. It doesn’t really lack for luggage space and most owners don’t need more than 2 seats.
Yep, the pre-Ford Jaguars are unreliable and break down all the time. Of course, they’re not overhyped in the reliability department at all… Jags have always been known for being a pain in the neck to work on and needing plenty of work often.
The guy bought it as part-investment/part-weekend driver.
In order to afford the insurance, he’s can’t drive it more than 2000 miles per year. He rarely drives it more than 500 and never to a track to let it loose. It’s more for car shows (he’s chromed everything in the engine bay that can be chromed (but keeps the original parts in the event he wants to make it stock again)).
That’s okay for him, but if I paid nearly $50,000 for a car, I’m going to drive the damned thing! He did end up buying a '77 Corvette and is in the middle of restoring it.
The friend’s husband had his Corvette because it’s a macho car and he’s a macho kinda guy (and it’s actually a C4 now that I think of it - late 80s).
The Elise is the only car that’ll stay with it off the line. Anything else gets “beat deep”.
I don’t know what else beats it in the corners. I’ve seen Corvettes take fastest-time-of-day at autocrosses that are so tight they never use full throttle. It’ll go around corners faster than a Miata, MR2 Spyder, NSX, S2000, or 911. Sure, you can put some slicks and stiff bars on a CRX or Miata and out-corner it but stock for stock it really is faster around corners than just about anything else.
I don’t know. If it’s a 2001 Z06, and it’s in damn near perfect condition, and never driven much, it won’t depreciate much. But a 2002-04 Z06 that’s used as a summer daily driver and raced on some weekends is going to depreciate like salad.
British car show Top Gear put all of their tested cars on a very curvy track, designed by Lotus engineers. The driver is “The Stig”, rumoured to be Perry McCarthy, ex-F1 driver (albeit a lower echelon one).
All right, it might help to know that the Vette is a little pricier on this side of the Atlantic.
So OK, the Vette offers value for money in the US, and from what I’ve seen, the latest incarnation is a fine driver’s car. Still, your remark about its cornering speed keeps raising my eyebrows.
Yes, expensive, and Honda dealers are notorious for refusing to haggle and charge stupid hidden fees. I’ve owned two, one used, and one new - bought from the Honda dealer. Are they slow? At the time I had them, they were fast, but no one else had 16-valve engines. I think 125 hp seems underpowered by today’s standards – are they still at 125 hp for the EX (or whatever the EX is today)? Mine were comfy as hell. As a 6’2"-er, they were the only subcompacts I could fit into. Okay, I said subcompacts, which is an admission of smallness. Yeah, dinky little things. Ugly? Mine weren’t, but the hatch backs in the 90’s got really ugly, and I’m suprised at how God-damn ugly they all are now. Thank God they’ve got the Honda label on them. And reliable? Hell, yeah. If I had to drive a tiny car and couldn’t get a Focus, my next best choice would be a Civic.
Pretty cheap for an SUV. Not slow, but not a Corvette (duh!). Prettier with every makeover – I almost regret getting the slightly-nicer Expedition. Only rolls over and kills grandma if you’re a dumbass – just don’t be a dumbass. Reliable? One of the most reliable cars on the road. Even Consumer Reports agrees.
Popular? Where? I miss the original air-cooled Beetles. Overpriced. Oddly, you’re disparaging reliabilty on the above vehicles, where the Beetle (and VW in general) is significantly LESS RELIABLE than the average!
Okay, most overhyped: Honda in general. There’s a feeling that if it’s a Honda, it must be the best. They’re good cars, and I loved both of mine. Actually, the same goes for Toyota. Finally, Chryslers are way overhyped for their brilliant designs, but they’re reliability is, uh, well below the average, even for pre-2004 Hyundai.
