However, despite having large marketing efforts put into the project, it never sold as well as planned and ended up as a commercial failure. 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. 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. James May called it the ugliest car ever built, saying about it "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." .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 (1954–62) Nash Metropolitan The body was also rather heavy, which combined with the small motor made the car underpowered and slow, reaching a top speed of 63 mph (101 km/h). 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, thus making the design and proportions look rather odd. It shared some components with the Standard Vanguard and had a motor that was based on that of the Standard Ten. 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. Conversely, some vehicles which were poorly received at the time ended up being reevaluated by collectors and became cult classics.ġ940s Triumph Mayflower (1949–53) Triumph Mayflower 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. įor 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. Different sources use a variety of criteria for including negative reception that includes the worst cars for the environment, meeting criteria that includes 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", as well as " lemon lists" of unreliable cars with bad service support, and the opinionated writing with humorous tongue-in-cheek descriptions by "self pro-claimed voice of reason".
There are no objective quantifiable standards, and cars on this list may have been judged by poor critical reception, poor customer reception, safety defects, and/or poor workmanship.
This is a list of automobiles known for negative reception.
0 kommentar(er)
