Failed cars that shouldn't have

[P3RG4R3C]

Ferrari F50 also springs to mind. The F40 is far more desireable despite being around 4 times as common.

[NSXType-R]

I like the suggestions, the G8 and the GTO, and the NSX, sort of. It wasn't supposed to be a heavy seller to begin with, but the fail comes in with the lack of a proper replacement. Same with the S2000.

The XJ220 looks great, but it failed because it didn't deliver what Jaguar promised.

I'll say something more obscure, the Tommy Kaira ZZII. It is one of the most beautiful and best performing cars to ever come from Japan, and it was only going to cost $100,000, for a car with a top speed of 210 mph.

Also the Jaguar XJ220, it's always looked upon as a failure but really it should go down as a legendary British exotic.

That was one of my favorite cars from Gran Turismo 3.

Chevy SSR and Dodge Prowler

Those two cars never should have been built the way they were. The Prowler looked great but was underpowered, the Chevv SSR was just plain stupid.

How about the Citroen SM? That was more a failure than a success no?

[pimento]

To go on a tangent, brands that have failed and shouldn't have:
Lancia. 'nuff said.
Maserati: Very nearly went the same way as Lancia, but are redeeming themselves now.
Lotus: The new CEO wants to take them upmarket... read: luxury, louder, lardier... a Ferrari wannabe.

[Cyco]

Can the McLaren F1 be considered a failure on sales numbers?

[wwgkd]

It was a good car tied to a dying brandname and marketed fairly poorly.

Plus, It's like buying a pastiche version of American muscle, when the Mustang is down the street and the Camaro is further down the lot.

You can say a lot of things about the G8 but one thing I will say is that in comparison to it's competition, it was positively subtle, and if there is one thing the American musclecar market doesn't take to, it's subtlety.

The thing about it is that it wasn't really supposed to be a muscle car. It had 4 doors, which would leave it failing since it's seen as more family than muscle. It was a pretty sweet 4 door for the price, though, considering the better selling alternatives included the new charger.

The new GTO failed due to it's name and weak styling. The name was legendary and brought about huge expectations. What showed up was a car that looked like it belonged in a rental fleet and used "just" a detuned version of the vette engine. It underwhelmed and the stick on scoops they added for the facelift were just insulting.

Chevy SSR and Dodge Prowler

The SSR was an answer to the PT Cruiser, which was in itself an answer to a question nobody really asked. Sold very well in california to the lowrider crowd, but sat on lots everywhere else. The prowler was a radical muscle/hotrod concept that they put into production with a V6. Even if it made the power it wasn't going to sell in that market with a 6.

To go on a tangent, brands that have failed and shouldn't have:
Lancia. 'nuff said.
Maserati: Very nearly went the same way as Lancia, but are redeeming themselves now.
Lotus: The new CEO wants to take them upmarket... read: luxury, louder, lardier... a Ferrari wannabe.

Lotus and luxury just seems so wrong to me. They had such a resurgence with the Elise, why get rid of what made you so successful again? Maybe add higher models, but they're doing it throughout the line.

[kingofthering]

The Toyota 2000GT died as it was outrageously expensive, but frankly, it was worth every penny. Oh, and the Vauxhall Firenza with the awesome droopsnoot because it was the gas crisis. The KPGC110 Skyline GT-R sold 107 copies for similar reasons and was the "last" one until the 1989 revival.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I think Lotus is just trowing out ideas to see how people react (see: in a predictable way). It's more than likely that they will stick to the present line-up, and add something a bit up-market with the always rumores new Esprit, and possibly something also cheaper than the 2-Eleven. I don't mind their plan to be honest, as long as the present offer stays there, I'm not worried about having more cars in your line-up (wondering if Lotus can survive only with the Elise on its own legs), more cars racing in more categories and a few more options on the market when it comes to sports car, no matter what the price is.

[pimento]

The way they were saying it made it seem that the elise type things would be abandoned in this push upmarket.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

The thing about it is that it wasn't really supposed to be a muscle car. It had 4 doors, which would leave it failing since it's seen as more family than muscle. It was a pretty sweet 4 door for the price, though, considering the better selling alternatives included the new charger.

The new GTO failed due to it's name and weak styling. The name was legendary and brought about huge expectations. What showed up was a car that looked like it belonged in a rental fleet and used "just" a detuned version of the vette engine. It underwhelmed and the stick on scoops they added for the facelift were just insulting.

You think the scoops were insulting to the GTO name, the Monaro (which is what it was) was a car that started off so slinky and sexual that adding Pontiac ram-air scoops to it is like drilling Eva Green in the face until she has four nostrils. WTF.

It's an amazing thing to consider but Australians and Americans have a very different understanding of what constitutes a muscle car. the G8 you guys received was essentially a model between our Commodore SS and HSV Clubsport, something pretty nifty.

[roosterjuicer]

The SSR was no good, in part, because it was extremely expensive.


I dont know why anyone would call the s2000 or the NSX a "failed car that never should have been". For a time, the NSX was one of the best cars in the world, the problem was that it did not get updated to keep up with its competition in its price range but it was a success when it came out and for a few years after that. It was also the first "reliable supercar". It raised the bar for other supercar makers! It made them make better cars. So no, it was not a car that never should have been.

S2000 is a bit closer to that. But it was a fun car that sold in respectable numbers. When it came out it was relatively quick. Not the greatest car ever but once again im not going to say that honda should never have built it.

[csl177]

Rooster, the thread is "failed cars that shouldn't have", not "failed cars that never should have been". I agree, both the NSX and the S2000 are terrific. Though both initially sold well, declining numbers meant Honda ultimately pulled the plug. The good thing for enthusiasts is these are available for reasonably money, and IMO are future collectibles. I've never driven an S2000 but the NSX still impresses me, 20 years later.

As to replacements from Honda for these models? No incentive... Honda sadly chose to emulate Toyota rather than follow Sochiro's vision.

[culver]

Kitdy had a great post. We may like a number of cars that failed but they failed anyway. Ford tried to bring over the Sierra in the late 90s. It was a complete failure because the car was badly marketed and cost quite a bit more than a Taurus. The Taurus wasn't as good a drivers car but for most people the fact that it delivered better value was the thing that mattered.

The GTO wasn't a run away sales success in the US for several reasons. The gas price comment is true. The US consumers had just seem gas literally double in price over a few years. That scared the entire market away from thirsty cars. Second, in the US there had been pent up demand for "classic American V8 cars" the GTO really wasn't it. The Chrysler 300 was a pretty good interpretation of a modern V8 American sedan. It offered V8 power at a price that was generally affordable. At the time the only import brands with V8s were luxury models... and kind of the W8 Passat.

The GTO was to limited. We got only the 2 door at a time when 4 doors are more popular than ever. Due to some safety rule the US version moved the gas tank to behind the rear seat. That really hurt trunk space and meant the seat couldn't be folded. Also, it was just an old platform.

The G8 probably would have sold well when gas was cheaper. When it came our Pontiac was trying to rebuilt it's image which didn't help then the brand was closed. That also hurt sales. Also, like the GTO, the G8 was made in Australia and imported. That raised the cost quite a bit. There was talk of building it here but I think the arcane CAFE rules which list import and domestic mileage separately killed that plan.

When CAFE was first introduced the UAW didn't want the Big 3, who at the time all had overseas operations, to simply import high mileage cars to meet CAFE. In a effort to protect their jobs they said import and domestic fleet averages would be separated thus the Big 3 would have to make small cars in the US to off set the large cars. This actually was a really crappy deal for the Big 3. Instead of being able to import cars from their overseas operations they had to setup plants in the US to build small cars that really weren't in big demand in the US in the late 80s and on thought the 90s. The net result was the companies sold small cars at a loss so they could sell larger profitable cars. That in turn meant they stripped out the small cars and didn't update them because they were loss leaders. Had they been able to import the good small cars made for overseas markets perhaps the domestics would have been in better shape when the gas prices shot up. Since those small Fords and Opels were never intended for US sale they were never setup to meet US emissions and safety standards. I'm sure with only minor modifications they could have but they weren't. It's convoluted but basically this was yet another way the UAW worked to bite the hand that feed it.

Anyway, the death of Pontiac was the death of the G8 in the US. Hard to say if we can call it a failure yet given the brief time on the market. The reviews were all rather positive.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Talking about my choices, I think all luxury sedans from Europe had something valuable and peculiar, but eventually none of them sold well because they weren't one of the German 3, end of story.
The Lancia Thesis was a terrific tour de force of electronics and technology, a huge step forward compared to the Kappa and possibly better then the former Thema. Other automakers were a little concerned about its potential and its offer of an S-Klasse fighter for the price of an E-Klasse. It may have been ugly for many, but I still can't see the E60 5 Series as a good looking car, or even the present A6, which I think it could even do without a bodywork, because it's definitely not what buyers care. Ok, they may be looking for understatement, but honestly, who cars about you when you're driving an E-Klasse? who turns his head? And who doesn't know that A6 is as expensive as the E?

Anyway, the Alfa 166 was exactly like the former 164, just bigger and more luxurios. Good handling, good engines, good equipments, low price. It was among the first cars to feature a 7" or so monitor for the on board computer even without the sta nav checked a an option. A similar feature was present in the Lancia Lybra, which not only was among the best bangs for buck out there, but it was also extremely comfortable and perfect at driving mroe than 30.000 km a year. The sedan was definitely ugly, but the wagon was just fine.

Talking French, the 607 was under priced, well equipped, solid, and I'd dare to say good looking. Engines were just fine and it was much more understated than any Audi you could ever dream of after the first A4.

The present C6 is basically the same as the Lancia Thesis, except that it's better looking, objectively. I think I saw like 5 of them, and since in the last months I saw like 3 of those, I thought they were giving them away as free gifts at some local store.

Volvo S80. What's wrong with it? Same as all the others, understated, well equipped, well priced, good engines (the D5 diesel engine being among the best out there, except possibly for the larger Mercedes' V6), very low sales, even worse for the second gen, which I think it's also better looking.

Saab 9-5. When it was newer sales were a bit better, but right after BMW pulled put the 30d models, people went nuts for large, expensive pointless diesel engines, and Saab took too long to adopt the even older 2.2 engine from Opel. Such a shame. I can see why the car failed over the years, but as for the others even having the right engine back in the days wouldn't have helped.

[henk4]

Whenever a discussion about cars turns into: "for that sort of money you can buy an Audi, BMW or Mercedes", you know that the discussion has reached a dead end street.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Whenever a discussion about cars turns into: "for that sort of many you can buy an Audi, BMW or Mercedes", you know that the discussion has reached a dead end street.

That was the fate of half those cars too.