And for today's blog, I'm going for the "What were they thinking?!" pages of the automotive industry. Vehicles that we all know are successful but when you look at them, truly analyze them, you can only come to one conclusion and it goes something like this: "HUH?!!" (I'm summarizing, of course).
For instance, let's start with the goiter-on-wheels, the Buick Rendezvous. This vehicle looks like it's upside-down! Really! Look at the grill, it's in three parts and none of them even bother to blend. It looks like the lower two-thirds of the grill wants to be anonymous! Then there's that ugly slope in the back, by the C-pillars, as if the rear-end had been sliced-off by a sledding accident when it was a 6 year-old child and replaced with some sort of skin transplant.
The truly oddest thing about the Buick Rendezvous is that it came out at the same time as the Pontiac Aztec and that vehicle was killed off just as quickly as it came to the market. It was 'terminated' because of the poor market reaction to its angular shapes and the odd rear end. Hmm, wait a minute... that's the same rear end on the Buick! Could it be that only pensioners with failing eyesight bought them? Are there really that many people who didn't want a LeSabre but thought a minivan-ette (or whatever you want to call it), would be a better choice? Let's face it, Buick isn't exactly targeting the video game generation. But seriously, it isn't a good looking vehicle, but people bought them up like they were going out of style, (as if they ever were in-style).And they're too tall for a too-short wheelbase making for a very 'tippy' vehicle. It's not even possible to pretend there was any noteworthy performance. I really don't understand that truck/car/mini-something or whatever it is... or isn't.
And then there's the new Honda Fit. Good grief it's terrible. It's ill-proportioned, truly empty of any conveniences, a high starting price for essentially a frame and some windows. It has no flow in the shape and typical of most new Hondas for the last 25 years, it looks like the engineers ran out of lattees and had to decide whether they should finish the car's shape or run off to Starbucks for a refill... and you can guess how that decision ran. (Remember the CRX or Del Sol?). It's like its that 'special child', you know the one: "You're not different, you're special".
And when measured against its market competitors, such as the Nissan Versa, it just pales in comparison. At least the Versa has a finished body style. It also has an incredibly extensive options list that when all the boxes are checked, it's barely 2K ABOVE the starting price of the Fit.
The biggest problem with the Fit is the illusion that it's a good product just because it's a Honda. They've worked hard at concealing just how bad some of their products truly are, by not issuing recalls, for example. Have you ever heard of a product recall by Honda? I didn't think so. They generally issue 'voluntary recalls', essentially making their dealer network aware of certain deficiencies without publicizing them so that IF an owner becomes aware of a recall, they'll make a concession on the owner's behalf 'because they're such a good customer'. Give me a break. If you believe that, I've got some real estate going cheap in the Florida Keys!
Also, there's how structurally flimsy they are. A friend of mine had an Element and he practically t-boned an Oldsmobile who ran a light, running without headlights on. Despite the fact that physics dictates that the object that is the receiver of the energies of the impact usually suffers the most damage, his entire front end was plowed in. Though his insurance company ultimately decided to write it off, we always assumed that the reason the airbags didn't go off was because the Honda's computer decided the strength of the impact was not sufficient enough to deploy the airbags. I know sit and wonder... just how accurate is that assumption? Also, only last week, I saw an accident in which a Civic rear-ended an older Corolla and though the Corolla had only a damaged taillight hanging out of the body, the Civic's entire front-end had been torn from the body and what remained was a car that started from the firewall. Just look at the front end of the Fit, would you want to be in it when its involved in a frontal-collision of any sort? I didn't think so.
My wife was also involved in a rear-ender with a Civic, in which the Civic hit her Mazda's rear and in which the Civic was practically folded up like an accordion.
I say to you: don't be fooled by a clever years-long campaign to keep the truth from us. To quote a poignant show that I used to watch: "The Truth is out there".
And now, on what has to be the ugliest car on North American streets, the Toyota Echo. What kind of designer drug were the engineers smoking when they came up with that car?! First there was the two-door. Good God, what was the design inspiration for that? A suppository? I know they had to replace the Tercel but it was frankly one of their best cars and something like the Tercel was what they were looking for. But boy did they miss!! I mean really, just how drunk do you have to get in order for that car to start to look good??! (Guys, you know what I mean!)
And it's not just the outside of the car, the inside was a stoner's haven. First of all, since when have government regulations or even common-sense allow for the gauges and other major information displays to be moved out of the LINE-OF-SIGHT??! Now I know the economics-related reason they did this: with the console in the middle, they don't have to invest in designing and building consoles for the left-hand drive cars and others for the right-hand drive markets. But common sense dictates that the best place for the most important gauges should be the closest possible, within the line of sight being the best. Who can sit there with that plastic gap staring back at you? It was, quite possibly, the cheapest car that Toyota has built and I'm not making any reference to the price. it only got marginally better when the hatchback came out, at least that car's exterior was 'styled'. The sedan and the two-door, (no way am I calling THAT a coupe!), had no style whatsoever. The creases in the body were in the wrong places, the colors were the wrong ones for the shapes (every car has ITS color), even the tires were too small. It had no real storage space either. In the most plain terms I can use, it was just: UGLY!
The above-noted vehicles, barely cars as they are, are just the top three vehicles that I can think of in North America that qualify as ugly, useless and they truly make a person wonder.
I guess, I just don't understand them!
In the following posts, I will be writing about some test-drives I've taken of some of the more serious vehicles that you can get into without having a horrid haircut and a ruthless corporate image.
No comments:
Post a Comment