The Forgotten Cars Thread
- Thread starter el fayce
- 1,373 comments
- 162,669 views
- 40,766
Sure, if you're willing to forgo the glass roof and butterfly doors and nice interior and 5 horsepower:
Last edited:
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
That explains it, we never got one of those to begin with lol.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
2004 Mitsubishi Diamante. In 2004, the way-outdated and poor-selling second-generation Diamante was given a facelift, and was only on sale in 2004, before Mitsubishi finally ended it's production. The facelift was only available on American models, therefore the JDM and Australian ones did not receive it. These are rare enough that I've only recall seeing one ever on the roads, which was a few day ago at the supermarket.
That Lancer-esc face looks horrendous. 
The pre facelifted Magna/Diameter looks better in contrast.
Yeah it ain't a looker but still. I kinda wish if Mitsubishi Motors kept developing & selling the Lancer, Galant, Magna, Pajero and such.
The pre facelifted Magna/Diameter looks better in contrast.
Yeah it ain't a looker but still. I kinda wish if Mitsubishi Motors kept developing & selling the Lancer, Galant, Magna, Pajero and such.
Last edited:
- 11,805
- Marin County
This isn't so much a forgotten car but rather a forgotten perspective of a car. It occurred to me today that you don't see many PT cruisers around anymore. I've heard that they are pretty fragile, typical for a Chrysler product of that any era. But in any case, I actually thought about the PT Cruiser today and tried to un-remember how completely ubiquitous they became in the first 2 decades of the 21st century. If you do manage to put yourself in that mindset, the PT Cruiser is a really weird car! It's actually almost unbelievable that a car with 1940s styling grafted onto a proto-CUV could have become so thoroughly mainstream in the first place. It's like if the Prowler became as commonplace as Mustangs or if the Morgan 3-Wheeler replaced the MX-5 as the go-to small sports car. The PT Cruiser, you remembered it for how ****ing weird it was/is here first.
Just look at it and try to unsee the 2 decades of domesticated familiarity. See it through those tiny Matrix glasses of 1999.
I'm tempted to call the entire segment of retro-themed rolling pastiches so hot at the turn of the millennium (Chevy SSR, Ford Thunderbird, Ford Mustang, Prowler, etc) Boomer Bait.
Just look at it and try to unsee the 2 decades of domesticated familiarity. See it through those tiny Matrix glasses of 1999.
I'm tempted to call the entire segment of retro-themed rolling pastiches so hot at the turn of the millennium (Chevy SSR, Ford Thunderbird, Ford Mustang, Prowler, etc) Boomer Bait.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
I still see plenty of them around, even the pre-facelift models. Not as common as they once were for sure, but I still see more of them than Neons, Calibers, and Stratuses of the same era.
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
It took me 18 years to figure out that the 1986-1991 Buick Lesabre and 1986-1991 Buick Electra are two completely different cars. For the longest time, I just thought that the Electra was a more luxuriously-equipped Lesabre. I had no idea that these two cars had completely different platforms and engine options. They look exactly the same to me. They are even the same length (197 inches). So I have to ask, what was the point of Buick offering both the Lesabre and the Electra if they are so similar to one another?
Lesabre:
Electra:
The same phenomenon can be observed for the 1986-1991 Olds 88 and 1986-1991 Olds 98. The 88 was based on the Lesabre while the 98 was based on the Electra. I can barely tell these cars apart either.
88:
98:
Gotta love GM.
Lesabre:
Electra:
The same phenomenon can be observed for the 1986-1991 Olds 88 and 1986-1991 Olds 98. The 88 was based on the Lesabre while the 98 was based on the Electra. I can barely tell these cars apart either.
88:
98:
Gotta love GM.
- 40,766
Eldorado/Grand Am is the most infamous one; since it was also such a disastrous downsizing effort for the former on top of that.
Though the problem wasn't limited to just GM in the 80s. They just did most of the bleeding since GM design was so lost when Chuck Jordan was passed over to lead it and Roger Stone was running the company into the ground.
Though the problem wasn't limited to just GM in the 80s. They just did most of the bleeding since GM design was so lost when Chuck Jordan was passed over to lead it and Roger Stone was running the company into the ground.
Last edited:
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
I can see some resemblance, but those do not look as similar as the 88 and 98 posted above, by a long shot. Plus, the 1985-1991 Eldorado was a whole fourteen inches longer than the 1985-1991 Grand Am Coupe (191 compared to 177). Or am I thinking of the wrong generations?
You seem to be pretty well-versed when it comes to GM history, so I ask you, what was the rationale of offering both the 88 and 98, and Lesabre and Electra, when there's almost zero noticeable differences between the two. Given that the Lesabre outsold the Electra by a quite a lot, it's clear that most buyers didn't want to spend the extra $3000 for a more "luxurious" car that's exactly the same.
- 40,766
This is the Riviera/Somerset, but they are the same cars as the Eldorado/Grand Am (in itself its own problem).
It's even more obvious and problematic with the Seville; where twenty thousand 1980s dollars separated the GM flagship from the compact that was a half step above the Cavalier. And in-person even when standing right next to one, the Eldorado/Seville don't look anywhere near as large as they are. Some of that's due to different standards for cars today (like greenhouse size); but a lot of it is due to the weird proportions that most of Rybicki's cars had in general.
Luckily the 1982 Camaro/Firebird were styled largely under Mitchell before he retired and the C4/Fiero largely were done in secret without any input from the styling department, or nothing GM made until Jordan came back would have looked good.
Forward momentum. 98 (and Electra) were built on whatever platform the DeVille was on. 88 (and LeSabre) were built on whatever platform the Caprice was on. They were styled to look similar (as were the Buicks against each other) and it's questionable how necessary it was to have two platforms so similar to each other for any of GM's model range even before the 1980s downsizing, but the 98 usually debuted new styling a year sooner at least and was a bit larger of a car that did look a bit different
It was when GM downsized everything the second time for the generation of cars you posted when the distinctions basically became meaningless and the 98 was a glorified trim level with a different roofline, but that was just a microcosm of how hopelessly rudderless GM was at the time anyway. GM still denoted the cars as being two different platforms, and the 98 still had the "premium" platform while the 88 had the "basic" one; but the platforms were so similar at that point that the only net effect was raising costs for GM on the differences between the two that didn't need to be there.
Last edited:
- 11,805
- Marin County
This is the Riviera/Somerset, but they are the same cars as the Eldorado/Grand Am (in itself its own problem).
It's even more obvious and problematic with the Seville; where twenty thousand 1980s dollars separated the GM flagship from the compact that was a half step above the Cavalier. And in-person even when standing right next to one, the Eldorado/Seville don't look anywhere near as large as they are. Some of that's due to different standards for cars today (like greenhouse size); but a lot of it is due to the weird proportions that most of Rybicki's cars had in general.
Luckily the 1982 Camaro/Firebird were styled largely under Mitchell before he retired and the C4/Fiero largely were done in secret without any input from the styling department, or nothing GM made until Jordan came back would have looked good.
Forward momentum. 98 (and Electra) were built on whatever platform the DeVille was on. 88 (and LeSabre) were built on whatever platform the Caprice was on. They were styled to look similar (as were the Buicks against each other) and it's questionable how necessary it was to have two platforms so similar to each other for any of GM's model range even before the 1980s downsizing, but the 98 usually debuted new styling a year sooner at least and was a bit larger of a car that did look a bit different
It was when GM downsized everything the second time for the generation of cars you posted when the distinctions basically became meaningless and the 98 was a glorified trim level with a different roofline, but that was just a microcosm of how hopelessly rudderless GM was at the time anyway. GM still denoted the cars as being two different platforms, and the 98 still had the "premium" platform while the 88 had the "basic" one; but the platforms were so similar at that point that the only net effect was raising costs for GM on the differences between the two that didn't need to be there.
Been trying real hard to see through the malaise...the Seville is actually not bad looking. Almost Giugiaro-like. Almost. The Reatta (related?) was actually genuinely pretty.
- 40,766
The Reatta was the first car done under Jordan's watch, before he even officially took over. It was made to offset the poor morale in the styling department that Rybicki caused after outsourcing the Allante to Peninfarina; and like the Fiero it was largely done in secret until it was pretty much done.
Last edited:
I honestly tend to forget GMs lineup from the 80s that aren't
1) Muscle/Sporty Cars
2) B/C Body based cars
3) Trucks
Especially all of those "downsized" FWD ones. I guess that's a good thing.
-----
Lexus CT200h is a one that's forgettable at best. It's a reasonably sized hybrid hatchback that sat slightly below the ES and IS price wise but not by much. I assume it might have done well in other markets but here, barely anyone have bought one.
1) Muscle/Sporty Cars
2) B/C Body based cars
3) Trucks
Especially all of those "downsized" FWD ones. I guess that's a good thing.
-----
Lexus CT200h is a one that's forgettable at best. It's a reasonably sized hybrid hatchback that sat slightly below the ES and IS price wise but not by much. I assume it might have done well in other markets but here, barely anyone have bought one.
- 29,726
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
A neighbor of mine has one. But yeah, I don't know that I've seen a single other one in the last five years and I haven't seen many overall.
...
Saw one of these pulling out of a parking lot as I was pulling in this morning.
I know I've seen another in person, but it's been many years and I tend to forgot they were made for a period. I really like this generation 4Skinner, but the two-door variant is awkward.
Roo
Premium
- 7,419
- Hampshire, UK
- GTP_Roo
When I was growing up my parents had a saloon one of these, a 1.5l manual in gold, registration D956BPD. They bought it new in June 1987, and it was our only car for more than a decade. When I was 14 it became the first car I ever drove. They scrapped it sometime around 2002-2003. I remember it having rectangular front fog lights in the grille, which seem to be uncommon. It got replaced by a used E-reg 626 GD or GV. Haven't seen one of either for years.
I didn't even know 2 door variants of the second gen 4Runner even existed.Saw one of these pulling out of a parking lot as I was pulling in this morning.
I know I've seen another in person, but it's been many years and I tend to forgot they were made for a period. I really like this generation 4Skinner, but the two-door variant is awkward.
- 11,805
- Marin County
Northern California is crawling with the Lexus CT variants. When they were still available, not sure there was a car better suited for conspicuously declaring that you have money and you care about the planet in the pre-Model 3 era. I'm pretty sure every Lexus CT buyer now drives a Model 3.
- 23,924
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
1996-2000 Oldsmobile LSS, LSS short for "Luxury Sports Sedan". It was no secret that by the mid-1990s, Oldsmobile was increasingly perceived as a brand for senior citizens pumping out generic, soulless cars, and could not compete against its foreign rivals, as evidenced by its declining sales (330,000 total units sold in 1996 compared to over a million units just 10 years earlier). Although it was based on the humdrum Eighty-Eight mid-sized sedan, the LSS, along with the Aurora, was supposed to win over Acura, Infiniti, and Lexus buyers. Though due to its body-colored panels, absence of chrome, bespoke 18-inch alloys, and having the "modern Oldsmobile" badge found on the Aurora rather than the traditional "rocket Oldsmobile" logo, it looked quite different than the standard Eighty-Eight. So, this was GM's forgotten competitor to the Taurus SHO, and could also be seen as a budget-model Aurora. It was powered by the handy-dandy 3.8L Buick L67 Series II supercharged V6 making 240hp and 280 lb-ft, and given it's 0-60 time in the high-6's and top-speed of 145mph, it's performance seemed to be on par with the SHO. With a sticker price of $26,000, it was a good $8,000 less than the Aurora and its Japanese competitors, and exactly the same price as the Taurus SHO. I cannot find the specific sales figures for the LSS, but given by the late 90s Eighty-Eight sales drastically underperforming the Taurus, it probably didn't sell too well. Despite being a genuinely good car, in terms of price, performance, and fit-and-finish, Oldsmobile was too far gone by this point. I'd say this car deserves more credit than it gets.
Similar threads
