What cars "underwhelm" you, in terms of performance?

[TheCracker]

Lamborghini Countach LP400


This is another one that has bothered me for a long time now. So sporty, so fast in it's appearance, you would think it would have at least 500+ hp by looking at it, only to realize it is has 362 hp instead. Very upsetting to me and it's even worse knowing this prototype had that kind of power when this one didn't.

It was 1974 and it had to put that power down through 215/70 rear tyres. ( the car illustrated is a later LP500s which has about 455hp)

 

[ShobThaBob]

Ah yes, I have seen some cars before that look so fast, but aren't quite as I expected. This one has always been one of them....

Nissan R390

It looks like it would have at least 600+ hp, but in the end it only has about 345 hp, which is quite disappointing to me since it looks so fast. I do wonder why Nissan went so far to make it look this good and then only give it 345hp. *Insert confusedgirl.jpg here*

This car deserves better and shame on Nissan for not doing so.

Considering the R390 was never for sale and only 1 roadgoing car was made, I don't think it's worth any consideration. It wasn't a real car. And it made 550, not 345hp.

Lamborghini Countach LP400

This is another one that has bothered me for a long time now. So sporty, so fast in it's appearance, you would think it would have at least 500+ hp by looking at it, only to realize it is has 362 hp instead. Very upsetting to me and it's even worse knowing this prototype had that kind of power when this one didn't.

If you looked at this car and knew the size of the engine and when it was developed, you wouldn't be surprised at all with the power output. It seems to me that you don't have very much respect for power outputs and how they relate to other cars of their time, the weight of those cars, and the tire technology that was available to them.

 

[Tornado]

I'd also argue that looking like it was fast was more of the point with the Countach than actually being fast (or at least as fast as pretended) was.

 

[LM7325]

I always found the 4.2L Trailblazer rather underwhelming, a high revving (for a truck) DOHC engine that really doesn't seem happy about what it is. The 4.8 Vortec V8 would have been a much nicer choice with roughly the same real world fuel mileage.

 

[Legro]

Nissan R390

It looks like it would have at least 600+ hp, but in the end it only has about 345 hp... I do wonder why Nissan went so far to make it look this good and then only give it 345hp.

It technically did have more than 600 hp, it was just the race car that did. As far as the race car is concerned though, no one, except some Nissan employees, knows how much power it really had.

Lamborghini Countach LP400

So sporty, so fast in it's appearance, you would think it would have at least 500+ hp by looking at it, only to realize it is has 362 hp instead.

Considering that 500+ hp figures weren't commonly seen in the highest end of supercars until 2 decades later, 362 is perfectly adequate for the time.

Of course it being a 70s Italian supercar, whether an LP400 made 362 hp or not, is an entirely different subject.

 

[Sonygamer455]

Considering the R390 was never for sale and only 1 roadgoing car was made, I don't think it's worth any consideration. It wasn't a real car. And it made 550, not 345hp.

I thought it was only 2? The one I am mainly referring to is the one in GT series, which only had about 345 hp, but if it really is 550 hp, I take back what I said.

It was 1974 and it had to put that power down through 215/70 rear tyres. ( the car illustrated is a later LP500s which has about 455hp)

If you looked at this car and knew the size of the engine and when it was developed, you wouldn't be surprised at all with the power output. It seems to me that you don't have very much respect for power outputs and how they relate to other cars of their time, the weight of those cars, and the tire technology that was available to them.

Considering that 500+ hp figures weren't commonly seen in the highest end of supercars until 2 decades later, 362 is perfectly adequate for the time.

Truthfully I didn't even think about the time it was made when I made that post, my bad. I know I should have, I'll get my coat already....

 

[ShobThaBob]

It's all good. Putting cars in the right perspective is often necessary to see why they're enjoyable.

 

[Murcie_LP640]

The Mazda6 MPS. That motor has a fair bit of power behind it but instead of it being full of life and urge like it is in the 3 MPS it just sort of "slightly swells." I'd attribute that to its 1.6 tonne kerb weight though which is pretty damn portly for a mid-sized sedan of that era.

 

[05XR8]

The Mazda6 MPS. That motor has a fair bit of power behind it but instead of it being full of life and urge like it is in the 3 MPS it just sort of "slightly swells." I'd attribute that to its 1.6 tonne kerb weight though which is pretty damn portly for a mid-sized sedan of that era.

Similar to the VR6 in a Passat vs. GTI. The gearing was the main culprit. I had the VR6 from a '95 GLX w/VR6 Passat gearing.
However, from memory, the Mazda 3 MPS is like 3.0 final drive and the 6 is 3.4? Plus, the 3 ain't light. Nearly 1500kgs. It does undercut the 6 by 150kg as well.

 

[Obelisk]

Similar to the VR6 in a Passat vs. GTI. The gearing was the main culprit. I had the VR6 from a '95 GLX w/VR6 Passat gearing.
However, from memory, the Mazda 3 MPS is like 3.0 final drive and the 6 is 3.4? Plus, the 3 ain't light. Nearly 1500kgs. It does undercut the 6 by 150kg as well.

Isn't the Mazda6 MPS also all wheel drive?

 

[Murcie_LP640]

However, from memory, the Mazda 3 MPS is like 3.0 final drive and the 6 is 3.4? Plus, the 3 ain't light. Nearly 1500kgs. It does undercut the 6 by 150kg as well.

I don't know about the gearing, but even though the 3 isn't a lightweight either it still has a pretty handy 30kW/tonne advantage over the bigger 6.
@Obelisk yes the 6 is AWD.

 

[Kent]

I'm pretty sure it was a regular automatic. Did they only come with CVTs or something? It was hunting for gears and then screaming over 6k rpm. I'd normally expect a CVT to offer a much better experience.

... '08-'10 Corollas were using traditional Autos. I actually bought one for my mom (replaced it for her with an Impreza 2.5 hatch). Not a great car for people like us but definitely a great car for grandmothers trying to move grandchildren and groceries.

 

[Turbo]

Weighing in at almost 1,300kg and having barely over 100 horsepower, the Chevrolet Vega Cosworth was surely a sheep in a wolf's clothing. It may have been the mid-70s, but if this faux sports coupe shed some pounds and got a boost in power, it would make for a pretty decent import-fighter.

 

[TheCracker]

Weighing in at almost 1,300kg and having barely over 100 horsepower, the Chevrolet Vega Cosworth was surely a sheep in a wolf's clothing. It may have been the mid-70s, but if this faux sports coupe shed some pounds and got a boost in power, it would make for a pretty decent import-fighter.

Considering the most powerful 1975 Camaro had 155hp from 5.7ltrs and weighed a touch under 1,700kgs, i'd say those figures for the Vega aren't bad.

 

[LM7325]

Considering the most powerful 1975 Camaro had 155hp from 5.7ltrs and weighed a touch under 1,700kgs, i'd say those figures for the Vega aren't bad.

At least they were doing something with just a hint of performance, anything really.

When I owned my 1978 280Z I used to show off the engine plate with 170 horsepower quoted, in reality the L28 was making around 125-130 horses with it's mild 70's 8.3 compression, and much milder cam than the earlier 240z.

But the plaque said 170 hp, has to be so...

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

Like in the OP, I think the Sentra is quite an underwhelming car in today's age of sporty cars in its class. Basically, it's underwhelming due to not just what it's aimed at (Civic Si, Focus ST, Golf GTI), but just by the name it was given. When I see a Nismo logo or badge, I expect crazy performance coming out of the car. This car however just doesn't have the Nismo craziness and that's disappointing.

In comparison to the competition at the time, the 1999-2004 Mustang GT was rather underwhelming in terms of performance.

Lastly, the Toyota Corolla Matrix XRS.

 

[Turbo]

Like in the OP, I think the Sentra is quite an underwhelming car in today's age of sporty cars in its class. Basically, it's underwhelming due to not just what it's aimed at (Civic Si, Focus ST, Golf GTI), but just by the name it was given. When I see a Nismo logo or badge, I expect crazy performance coming out of the car. This car however just doesn't have the Nismo craziness and that's disappointing.

In comparison to the competition at the time, the 1999-2004 Mustang GT was rather underwhelming in terms of performance.

Lastly, the Toyota Corolla Matrix XRS.

I don't think the Matrix XRS was ever meant to be a sporty car, though. It was just the most expensive trim.

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

I don't think the Matrix XRS was ever meant to be a sporty car, though. It was just the most expensive trim.

With that flashy bodykit, I don't think so. Plus:

Beginning in 2008, Toyota began offering different trim levels in the United States and Canada. The XR trim became exclusive for Canada, and the S model was released only in the U.S., while AWD remained available in both markets after 2009. All vehicles have an independent front suspension with MacPherson struts,[30] but only XRS models and cars equipped with all-wheel drive and 158 horsepower, feature an independent rear suspension using double wishbones instead of a semi-independent torsion beam.[30][37]The 2009 models have less interior space than the preceding years, with a total of 48.9 cu ft (1.38 m3) compared to the original 53.2 cu ft (1.51 m3).[30]

Also, what makes it more underwhelming to me is that the previous generation XRS had 180 hp while this had just 158 hp.

 

[Tornado]

Weighing in at almost 1,300kg and having barely over 100 horsepower, the Chevrolet Vega Cosworth was surely a sheep in a wolf's clothing. It may have been the mid-70s, but if this faux sports coupe shed some pounds and got a boost in power, it would make for a pretty decent import-fighter.

It was a pretty decent import fighter, even in the strangled and overweight form that finally came out. None of the things it directly competed with in 1975/1976 were particularly lighter or more powerful in NA spec; and certainly not particularly faster. The main issue was the Vega was such a toxic and hated vehicle at that point, and the Cosworth came out so much later and lesser than what was promised, that costing a thousand dollars more than a Trans Am was so insane that it's a wonder GM actually bothered building it at all by then. The Capri probably didn't help even though its sales were also tanking.

 

[LM7325]

The 2014 Nissan Frontier I drive occasionally at work is rather underwhelming. It is blessed with the QR25, it really feels overmatched. The engine doesn't sound great either, the Fiesta I prefer has a nice note in contrast.
Having to rev 5500 rpm to maintain speed up a grade, while the engine sounds as if a rod bearing is about to fail gets old.

 

[Turbo]

Proton Wira "Special Edition"


Factory rice at it's finest. It's 1.8L four-banger cranks out a measly 90 horsepower, and the mismatched spoiler is essentially purposeless on this car. Adding insult to injury, the build quality is sub-par.​

 

[05XR8]

2nd-Gen SHO

I think the 1st-Gen did 0-60 in about 6-6.5 seconds(Road & Track? If I remember correctly, I had a magazine where both tyres were lit up to a photo. Awesome stuff back then). Pretty dang quick for a fwd sedan. That's just about as quick as a Mustang LX 5.0.

The 2nd-Gen was about 1 second slower. A workmate of mine had a custom exhaust and sticky Yokohama's. He couldn't pull me in my VR6 A2 Jetta and a friend's Galant VR4. So, he went and got a then, 222hp Maxima SE.

 

[2clicks]

The entire Maserati GranTurismo line does it for me.
​

I mean, when I first heard of it being announced, I thought it was going to go head-to-head with the F430 and Gallardo. The first one in the line up to break the 300km/h (186mph) barrier was the MC Stradale. I always shake my head at the fact that it sits at least one class lower than those other two cars in games.

 

[05XR8]

The entire Maserati GranTurismo line does it for me.
​

I mean, when I first heard of it being announced, I thought it was going to go head-to-head with the F430 and Gallardo. The first one in the line up to break the 300km/h (186mph) barrier was the MC Stradale. I always shake my head at the fact that it sits at least one class lower than those other two cars in games.

They sound nice though.

 

[LM7325]

2nd-Gen SHO.

The 5 speed cars were maybe a tick off the first gen cars, the '89 that blew everyone away in road tests was faster than any I witnessed. Most first gen, 5 speed 2nd gens were mid 15 second 1/4 mile cars. The automatic cars were slower still, but the bottom end was nice to give 5 speed cars a little more displacement.

 

[homeforsummer]

I mean, when I first heard of it being announced, I thought it was going to go head-to-head with the F430 and Gallardo.

Sounds more like your expectations were set a little too high than the car itself being underwhelming. Racing and special models (such as the MC-12) aside, Maseratis have always been closer to the grand tourer than the supercar end of the spectrum. Given the way it looks, sounds and actually performs (0-60 in <5s is hardly something to sniff at), I'd struggle to call it "underwhelming" if judged for purpose.

 

[Michelin Man]

The entire Maserati GranTurismo line does it for me.
​

I mean, when I first heard of it being announced, I thought it was going to go head-to-head with the F430 and Gallardo. The first one in the line up to break the 300km/h (186mph) barrier was the MC Stradale. I always shake my head at the fact that it sits at least one class lower than those other two cars in games.

I never put the Gran Turismo in the same bracket as the likes of the Gallardo and F430, after all, it is a Grand Tourer, something it suits and does very well.

At at the end of the day, I know which of the three I'd have, and it's not the F430 or Gallardo.
Plus it's a beautiful looking thing .

 

[CarreraGT]

Has anyone mentioned the Toyota GT86/Subaru BRZ? If not, that has to be the most underwhelming car of the last 5 or so years

 

[Pupik]

Has anyone mentioned the Toyota GT86/Subaru BRZ? If not, that has to be the most underwhelming car of the last 5 or so years

You know, this thread only has 88 posts; I think you can find that out by yourself.

It's been lauded for what it can do, not for overblown expectations. Nobody promised more power from its inception.

 

[homeforsummer]

Indeed. The GT86 is absolutely fantastic to drive, relative lack of power or not. Even then it's not really "slow" unless your sole purpose is straight-line racing. There's enough power to get down a twisty road pretty quickly, there's enough power to play with the rear axle a bit, and if you use all the revs it certainly feels quick. In other ways, far from underwhelming: great steering, great gearbox, fantastic driving position, good pedal feel, relatively light, agile, useful size, not too thirsty.

The only real issue is the price, since something like a 370Z is similarly-priced and obviously has more performance on offer. But hey, used ones are cheaper, and it's a lot of car for the money used.