Occasionally the industry produces that rare thing. A car inferior in almost every respect to the model it replaces... I postulated a few examples well down in that unworthy classics thread.... So what do you all think of these.....
Mk IV Ford...hideous barge with appaling rear suspension, awful V engines etc replaceing elegant Mk3 with nice basics and smoooth straight 6
Allegro...only superior in underbonnet access to the ADO16...and boy did it need to be...
Farina Magnette....an Austin A50 in Italian Drag...The Z was vastly superior except in boot space..
My top three..... Must be loads more Ive forgotten or never had....
The Vauxhall Astra Mk III The Ford Escort Mk V The Citroen XM (and to an extent, the BX, but it at least didn't rust). The total lack of replacement for the 2CV The Renault Super 5 The new Fiat Panda The Vauxhall Carlton (nothing like as nice as the FE) The Rover SD1 The Rover 800 (you mentioned that elsewhere) The Honda Civic, the one that replaced the split-hatch model The Impreza with bug eyes The Swift-based Subaru Justy (though personally, I like them) The total lack of replacement for the Subaru Justy ;) The Renault Safrane The Austin Ambassador Seat Marbella (IIRC, 'replaced' the Fura, based on the 127)
Most of the Alfas and Fiats launched in the 1970s were inferior to their predecessors, IMO. Was, for example, the 132 a better car than the 125 it replaced? I don't think so.
PJML ( snipped-for-privacy@nerc.ac.uk.loopback) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
True, but for 99.99% of their use? As the lardy upmarket on-road posewhale it's going to be used for, it's probably a far better car than the P38 Rangie it replaces.
Every VW Golf GTi since the Mark2 (or even the Mark1!!) - they just get heavier, less and less "pure". ...in that case, every contemporary "mini" car (Clio, Saxo) beyond it's first incarnation.
Oh yes, definitely the Mk. III Golf onwards. I find it hard to argue that the Mk II was worse than the Mk 1 in many respects, though.
The Peugeot 205 was an improvement over the 104 and Samba, which it effectively replaced. The ZX improved over the Visa in many respects. The 106 is also better than the 104. Most mainstream cars do improve - Peugeot 305-306, Vauxhall Astra 1-II, III-IV and IV-V, Ital - Montego for example.
Actually, for the sake of redundancy - Ital - Marina. No improvement at all, really.
*Beautiful* ride - the best this side of a hydropneumatic Citroen that I've ever come across and suprisingly wieldy, once you got the hang of it. Don't remember liking the power steering, and the front seats were pretty dreadful (only adjusted in discrete steps, and what fitted me was between the steps). Less room in it than Princess or Land Crab, but still pretty voluminous. Usual stick-in-a-jar-of-marbles BMC front-drive gearchange :( Have to admit I rather liked it (with SD1 front seats it would have been a lot nicer, though..). That said it was borrowed, and I've no idea of all the nasties that would lie in wait for an owner. There's still a 2.0 VdP auto around the town here though - pale green metallic and in very nice nick.
The 205 was a replacement for the 204 not the 104. However I'm not sure that the improvement has been maintained from the 205 to the 206 and from the 306 to the 307. It seems as though some key engineers have left the firm and they aren't paying as much attention as they did to making well suspended driver's cars, which is a pity.
Sorry...nicer engines with injection...better visibility...nicer dash, more Kit
Agree if you mean Mk 4. The Mk V with the oval noze and slight smoothing WAS an improvement so all the mags said making the Escort class acceptable but not leading, instead of dunce that the Mk 4 was.
Nicer than the CX in all but looks surely.
No comment as teh 2CV is crap...cheap crap yes but still crap. like a Moggy thou is.
Wots that?
Didnt knwo there was one...original again no great shakes.
Now there I defintely disagree...The early record based Carlton couldt possibly have been worse than an FE vcitor which was an utter abomination of a car.
C'mon...it looked great and had loads more space than a P6....drove well just made of crap steel..
Dint I just
Not really in to Japs so cant comment
I thought it was an okay effort...just the wrong badge to sell in an increasingly snobby market. The 25 wasnt hard to beat...
Just a Princess with the hatchback it should always have had surely?
The problem is that - generally - they don't *stay* as minicars after the model rollover. Bloat sets in. The most egregious example, of course, is that abomination of a BMW 1-series..
Actually to be fair there wasn't that much wrong with the SD1, other than being a shock after the P6, what let the car down was appalling build quality.
Richard Kilpatrick ( snipped-for-privacy@dmc12.demon.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
No, not even 304s. My german's fairly manky, but
formatting link
seems to suggest the 304 died in 1979 (saloon) and 80 (estate).
formatting link
seems to suggest the 204 died in '76.305, '77-89, according to
formatting link
Peugeot have never been sticklers for having the entire range available at any one time - it's just more obvious with them, because of the numbering scheme.
The 104 wasn't replaced by a 105, it just waited years until the 106 came out.
As you said, the 205 didn't immediately follow the 204, and it was a few years before the 206 filled a gap.
On the other hand, the 304 and 305 overlapped... But then there was a big gap before the 306.
There was a HUGE gap between 404 and 405, and what happened to the 506?
Should the 607 be a 507, because it isn't really big or prestige enough to be a 6-series? (Not the 605 was exactly glorious)
The Mk 4 was fine for the class/year. The Mk V was so bad it was redesigned in 18 months.
Not in my opinion. The CX engines are considerably more reliable, if the tech is older, it never bothered me. The CX is also immensely strong, and capable. The XM is quite fragile, especially the interiors. When you consider the estate/Safari, especially, the CX is the better car.
Meh. That's your opinion. I like 2CVs.
The 'new' 5, with transverse engine.
It's like a Korean car. Quite boring. Too much kit.
The FE Victor was so much better than the Rekord that General Motors crippled the model range, because introducing the 'new' Carlton just after a 2.3 Litre, stylish saloon that did 0-60 in 6.9 seconds would have been somewhat embarrassing. Someone else mentioned the Senator being replaced by the Omega, and I agree with that too.
The SD1 was crude engineering compared to the P6, and the P6 had enough space. History has shown that executive hatchbacks are simply not a good idea, even if everyone in the 70s beside BMW and Mercedes thought they would be.
And yet, the Safrane failed.
Uglier, nastier interior IMO, less rigidity despite the hatchback needing massive revisions to the bodywork, no six-cylinder option, and I spent many a happy childhood trip throwing up in one.
Cadillac Eldorado obscure? It's like the #2 car seen on "Worlds Wildest Police Videos".
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.