Some models of automobiles receive high positive acclaim or negative reviews in the media and trade magazines. Reviews are both subjective and performance-based, though there are no objective quantifiable standards. The automobiles on this list received overwhelming negative reviews based on a myriad of factors, including failures in the marketplace. Different sources use a variety of criteria for criticism, for example, the worst cars for the environment, meeting criteria for the worst crash test scores, the lowest projected reliability, and the lowest projected residual values, earning a "not acceptable" rating after thorough testing, determining if a car has performed to expectations using owner satisfaction surveys (whether they "would definitely buy the same car again if given the choice"), "lemon lists" of unreliable cars with bad service support, and opinionated writing with humorous tongue-in-cheek descriptions by those with a "self-proclaimed voice of reason".
For inclusion, these automobiles have either been referred to in popular publications as the worst of all time or have received negative reviews across multiple publications. Some of these cars were popular on the marketplace or were critically praised at their launch, but have earned a negative retroactive reception, while others are not considered to be intrinsically bad, but have acquired infamy for safety or emissions defects that damaged the car's reputation. Conversely, some vehicles that were poorly received at the time ended up being reevaluated by collectors and became cult classics.
1940s Triumph Mayflower (1949–1953)
The Triumph Mayflower was an attempt by Triumph to manufacture a luxury small car that, as its name suggests, was to appeal mainly to the US market. It shared some components with the Standard Vanguard and had a motor that was based on that of the Standard Ten. Its body was largely inspired by the Rolls-Royce and Bentley luxury limousines of the era, most notably the Rolls-Royce Silver Dawn, but was much smaller, making the design and proportions look rather odd. The body was also rather heavy, which combined with the small motor made the car underpowered and slow, reaching a top speed of .
James May of Top Gear called it the ugliest car ever built, stating "Its details are ugly, its overall proportions are ugly, its very concept – as a car to appeal to Americans who believed they were directly descended from the Pilgrim Fathers – makes one shudder." Stuff.co.nz included in an article on Cars that should never have been built, saying about it: "It always looked like the misshapen out of scale miniature of the larger, more elegant Renown model, viewed in the distorted reflection of a fairground mirror." It was featured in the books "The Worst Cars Ever Sold" by Giles Chapman, "Naff Motors: 101 Automotive Lemons" by Tony Davis and "The World's Worst Cars" by Craig Cheetham, who said that it had "the appearance of a Rolls-Royce Phantom that had been chopped in the middle."
1950s Nash/Austin Metropolitan (1954–1962)
The Nash Metropolitan was one of the first attempts by a US car maker to produce a small car "which would be mainly used as a second car." Compared to other small cars of the era, it was to be much more luxurious, intended to be "a big car in miniature" by its main developer George Mason. It was also one of the first cars specifically designed for and marketed towards women, being advertised as "a motorized shopping cart for affluent urban gals." It was developed by Nash in co-operation with British Austin Motors, who also produced it at their Longbridge plant, making it the first US-developed car to be entirely produced in a different country. However, despite having large marketing efforts put into the project, it never sold as well as planned and ended up as a commercial failure. The main reasons for this were considered its poor performance, poor handling, poor reliability, and the small market for small economy cars on the US market, with a rising prosperity that, despite Nash considering it exactly the car America needed, made the trend go to bigger, full-size cars.
Austin sold it under its own brand, and later as a standalone brand, on the European market, but it was not successful there either, with about 9,300 units sold. Brian Sewell of The Independent called it "one of the nastiest cars ever built." Stuff.co.nz included in its list of "Cars that should never have been built," saying: "Designed to conquer the US market by combining Nash styling with British small car mechanicals and innovation, the Metropolitan was an abject failure being the worst of both worlds." Money Inc. included it in its list of the 20 worst cars ever made, calling it "One of the biggest bombs in automotive history and definitely one of the worst cars ever made." The car has gained a cult following, with a small, but enthusiastic fan base in North America and Europe maintaining surviving examples and the collector's price for good cars rising, now reaching almost three times its original price.
Renault Dauphine (North American version) (1956–1967)
While the Renault Dauphine was a major sales success in Europe, where it is seen as one of the forerunners of the modern economy car, it received a very strong negative reception in the United States, largely for its poor performance and poor reliability. A period review of the Dauphine by Road & Track magazine found that the Dauphine took 32 seconds to accelerate to from a standstill. Autoblog included the Dauphine on its list of "The 20 Dumbest Cars of All Time" and it was included on Time list of the "50 Worst Cars of All Time", with writer Dan Neil calling it "The most ineffective bit of French engineering since the Maginot Line", while noting that its performance "put the Dauphine at a severe disadvantage in any drag race involving farm equipment." Car Talk also placed the Dauphine 9th on its 2000 "Worst Car of the Millennium" poll and the vehicle was named the 67th worst car of all time by Edmunds.com.
Another problem that damaged its reputation was rust. A 2008 retrospective article in The Independent said: "as soon as the US market had come to grips with the Dauphine's swing-axle manners and useless acceleration, they were pole-axed by its abysmal corrosion record. It would take only one New York winter of driving on salt-strewn roads to give a Dauphine front wings that resembled net curtains." Renault apologized for the Dauphine's flaws in American print advertisements, marketing its successor, the Renault 8, as "The Renault for people who swore they wouldn't buy another one".
Trabant (1957–1990)
The Trabant P50 was introduced in communist East Germany in 1957, followed shortly afterward by the updated 601 in 1963. Because of its outdated and inefficient two-stroke engine (which produced poor fuel economy, low power output, and thick, smoky exhaust fumes), duroplast body, and production shortages, the Trabant was regarded with derisive affection as a symbol of the economic downturn of East Germany and of the fall of the Eastern Bloc. Many East Germans streamed into West Berlin and West Germany in their Trabants after the opening of the Berlin Wall and the German reunification in 1989. However, the end of the GDR also meant the end of the Trabant as it was no longer competitive against its new, much more sophisticated West German, French, and Japanese competitors that quickly conquered the East German and Eastern European markets following the reunification and the end of the Eastern Bloc. VEB Sachsenring, the manufacturer, tried to respond with an updated Trabant, the Trabant 1.1, which was first shown in 1989 and featured a new four-stroke engine by Volkswagen, but this proved too little too late to save the outdated car, and production of the new version lasted only about one year. Time magazine named the Trabant one of the 50 worst cars of all time, and it was included in Automotive Atrocities! The Cars We Love to Hate with author Eric Peters describing its two-stroke, 18 horsepower engine as "Notorious for producing a billowing contrail of smoke, while its unsynchronized manual transmission required at least a fifth of Stolichnaya to deal with effectively."
Automotive journalist Dan Neil said the Trabant was the car "that gave communism a bad name" and was "a hollow lie of a car constructed of recycled worthlessness." He also noted that after East Germans drove their Trabants to freedom in West Germany, they immediately abandoned them. Edmunds.com ranked the Trabant as the 9th worst car of all time, claiming it is "one more reason why Communism is evil." In his book Crap Cars, Richard Porter ranked it the 9th worst car ever and said: "Before the old borders were broken down, us in the West thought we knew how harsh life was behind the Iron Curtain. Then we saw the Trabant. Oh, the humanity." It was the butt of jokes in East Germany. After the end of the GDR, these jokes quickly spread to West Germany as well and also became a pop culture phenomenon when comedy films like Go Trabi Go and Trabbi Goes to Hollywood featured Trabants as important plot devices. However, despite, and partly even because of its poor image, the Trabant has gained a strong cult following in the whole of reunified Germany, with many collectors clubs across the country maintaining surviving examples. Today it is considered a recognizable nostalgic symbol of the bygone world of the GDR that, together with other products considered typical for East Germany, regained popularity since the reunification due to "Ostalgie", a German term referring to nostalgia for aspects of life in East Germany.
Edsel (1958)
Launched with considerable publicity, the Edsel (named after Henry Ford's son) was the culmination of $400 million in investment and marketing by the Ford Motor Company to create a new brand of car positioned between the entry-level Ford and the medium-priced Mercury brand that was to compete against the General Motors brands Buick and Oldsmobile. Marketed as a radically different new car, the Edsel failed to impress the buying public – despite containing new features such as self-adjusting brakes and automatic lubrication, which would later be adopted across the automotive industry – as it mainly consisted of Ford and Mercury components already used in other vehicles. It became such a large commercial failure that the name "Edsel" remains synonymous with "commercial failure" in American popular culture. It was a big financial flop, generating losses estimated between $250 million and $350 million and bankrupting many Ford dealers.
Time magazine included it on its list of "The 50 Worst Cars of All Time", with automotive journalist Dan Neil writing that while the Edsel was not a bad car, "It was the first victim of Madison Avenue hyper-hype. Ford's marketing mavens had led the public to expect some plutonium-powered, pancake-making wondercar; what they got was a Mercury." The Los Angeles Times included it on its list of the 10 worst cars sold in the United States, calling it a "redecorated Mercury that had been beaten with an ugly stick. The legendary flop of all automotive flops." CNBC placed the Edsel on its list of the 10 ugliest cars of all time. The Edsel's unique "horsecollar" grille has been frequently ridiculed for resembling a toilet seat, and later even the female genitalia. Famous sarcastic descriptions of the Edsel and its famous grille include that it looked like "a Mercury pushing a toilet seat" or "an Oldsmobile sucking a lemon". The tail lamps were also criticized as looking like "ingrowing toenails".