Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
ElantraClub - For Elantra Owners and Enthusiasts _ The Auto Industry _ THE 10 UGLIEST CARS OF 2013
Posted by: Vinnie Sep 19 2013, 09:58 AM
Okay, so I don't know where this writer got her automotive critique experience from but I can assure you her resume has nothing about being an expert / reviewer / designer in the automotive industry.
http://crissindaponder.com/my-resume/
FAIL.
Some vehicles here I'm not fond of but JEESH!
From ugly to ugliest, here are Bankrate's picks for the 10 ugliest cars of 2013. Price stats belong to TotalCarScore.com, and mpg estimages from from FuelEconomy.gov. For those makes with more than one model option, we chose the base model to feature.
All text by Crissinda Ponder, Bankrate.com contributing writer
Coming in at # 10
Subaru Impreza
Price range: $17,895-$29,295
Mileage: 27 miles per gallon city/36 miles per gallon highway
If roads could talk, they would yell to drivers of these cars to never leave the house without a paper bag over their heads.
Coming in at #9
Kia Soul
Price range: $14,400-$19,000
Mileage: 27 miles per gallon city/30 miles per gallon highway
There's a reason hamsters star in the Soul's TV commercials. No human being should ever be seen operating these eyesores.
Coming in at # 8
Lincoln MKZ
Price range: $35,925-$39,045
Mileage: 22 miles per gallon city/31 miles per gallon highway
What's up with this car's grille? It looks like Lincoln wanted to appeal more to Harvey Birdman than everyday drivers.
Coming in at # 7
Hyundai Veloster
Price range: $17,450-$22,950
Mileage: 28 miles per gallon city/37 miles per gallon highway
Sorry, Hyundai, you lost several cool points for this one. Next time, finish designing the back of a vehicle before placing it in a dealer's showroom.
Coming in at # 6
Fiat 500
Price range: $16,000-$22,500
Mileage: 27 miles per gallon city/34 miles per gallon highway
"Small" is not synonymous with "cute." The Fiat 500 looks like a bug that someone tried to squish but didn't finish the job.
Coming in at # 5
Ford C-Max Hybrid
Price range: $25,200-32,950
Mileage: 45 miles per gallon city/40 miles per gallon highway
The only thing sexy about this car is its fuel economy. Otherwise, hang your head in shame if it was ever on your list of possible purchases.
Coming in at # 4
Smart ForTwo Coupe
Price range: $12,490-14,890 (FuelEconomy.gov)
Mileage: 34 miles per gallon city/38 miles per gallon highway
Why would you want to buy a car that looks like it will topple over if you sneeze in its direction?
Coming in at # 3
Toyota Prius Hybrid
Price range: $24,200-39,525
Mileage: 51 miles per gallon city/48 miles per gallon highway
When you decide to become an eco-friendly driver, keep in mind you give up style in the process.
Coming in at # 2
Nissan Cube
Price range: $16,760-18,860
Mileage: 27 miles per gallon city/31 miles per gallon highway
If the Kia Soul is the car of the hamsters, guinea pigs can definitely claim this one.
Coming in at # 1
Honda CR-Z Hybrid
Price range: $19,975-23,805 (FuelEconomy.gov)
Mileage: 36 miles per gallon city/39 miles per gallon highway
Honda was clearly going for an aardvark look with this car's design. There's no other explanation for its disfigurement.
Posted by: Bobzilla Sep 19 2013, 10:23 AM
No Juke? That is one ugly mug.
Posted by: slows gurl Sep 19 2013, 10:28 AM
The Juke's look like they forgot blinkers and realized it at the last minute and decided to just throw them on the hood.
Posted by: Red Elantra GT Sep 19 2013, 11:03 AM
Hey-I think she doesn't like cars that are non-mainstream, looks wise. A Corolla or something similar is probably what she drives.
I like the Juke but agree the lights on top in front need to go. It has a great stance from the side.
Posted by: slowgls Sep 19 2013, 01:51 PM
She must drive a suburban and think its ''hot''!
Hmm... Not one mini van here too.
Posted by: elantraguy241 Sep 19 2013, 04:09 PM
CR-Z number 1? That thing looks pretty cute in that color. A prius in black with nice rims, waxed and well taken care of actually looks really good too.
Posted by: popeye Sep 19 2013, 06:11 PM
The writer hasn't much of a clue other than the Veloster (sorry, never liked it) and the Cube and I'm not much of a Soul fan, soul music yes... How she overlooked the Juke is beyond me, that is one fugly mosheen. The Lincoln, Subie, Prius and CR-Z are reasonable looking though I drove a CR-Z and I would never own one, little to no rear view, backing up was a shot in the dark.
Posted by: a_v Sep 20 2013, 02:42 AM
Save the Cube, I wouldn't consider any of these cars "ugly." "Bland" on the Prius perhaps.
Posted by: bhorste Sep 20 2013, 09:57 AM
My brother owns a black CR-Z, and it's a sharp machine. I think the "manual" mode in the CVT is a waste of technology (and probably another $1500 on the price tag) but it's a very competent car. I bet it could really easily be made to handle well, and would be an absolute riot with just the 1.5 and a 5-speed.
Posted by: Bobzilla Sep 20 2013, 10:29 AM
The Honda backed CR-Z at Nationals finished 5 spots behind me.
Posted by: litesong Sep 20 2013, 11:31 AM
Wow! The Nissan 2012-13 Versa sedan wasn't included. I would have bought a Versa sedan except for its ugliness. Finally got a good deal on the Elantra, bought it, & now am glad the Versa was ugly!
Posted by: bhorste Sep 20 2013, 01:33 PM
It's the hybrid stuff... too much extra weight. I'm telling you: if they went with a CRX-type setup in that car, it'd be quick. And I bet I could've made it closer to you than the factory-backed driver.
Posted by: Bobzilla Sep 20 2013, 02:38 PM
What's really sad is that the Fit (non0hybrid) gets better fuel economy than the hybrid CR-Z, is quicker and handles better.
So what was the point of the CR-Z again?
Posted by: elantraguy241 Sep 20 2013, 03:00 PM
Concept sounds great on paper, but how the plan was carried out wasn't as pictured at the meetings? 
Wish I test drove a Fit before I bought Serenity 
Posted by: Bobzilla Sep 20 2013, 03:38 PM
Wish I test drove a Fit before I bought Serenity nO, You will be glad you didn't. They're narrow, cramped, loud and buzz like hell on the highway. The engine is overworked in that body and the fit/finish is mediocre at best. It truly is the Civic of the early 90's..... just with airbags and a $18k price tag.
Posted by: slowgls Sep 20 2013, 03:41 PM
The fit feels and is very cheap inside. Its an all right car.
Posted by: elantraguy241 Sep 20 2013, 05:18 PM
Well it's a good thing I didn't even lay my eyes on a Fit before buying Serenity.
Posted by: litesong Sep 21 2013, 01:57 PM
Always liked the Fit, but the price put me off..... with all the buzzing, too. Honda buzz still made for long lasting & reliable engines & bodies. However, the Fit has the same rpms as old 2006-11 Accents, & I enjoy my wife's 2008 Accent. Could get 42-45mpg, while ascending 1400-5500 mountain passes from sea level.
But, yeah. My Elantra(Epsilon Lyrae) is wonderful. Long live waiting.... & waiting some more..... for a good deal.
Posted by: elantraguy241 Sep 21 2013, 02:32 PM
While we're on the topic of the Fit, why is it's highway mileage rating so low? 33 highway must be massively underrated. With such a small engine and low weight shouldn't it get mileage like our Elantras?
Posted by: Red Elantra GT Sep 21 2013, 04:30 PM
Hey-Probably due to aerodynamics. It's rather challenged in that dept. I thought of getting one but it's really small.
Posted by: xdforme22 Sep 21 2013, 08:38 PM
As others have said, most of these do not make my list. I don't like the cube, but most of the others are either bland or just unique. IMHO Juke should have made the list along with the Honda Crosstour and BMW x6. CRZ/Veloster looks nice in person.
Posted by: litesong Sep 22 2013, 12:16 AM
First, the high rpms, similar to the 2006-11 Accents(3300rpm at 60mph), with similar EPA highway ratings, 32-33mpg, should limit official ratings. As stated above, that still didn't keep our Accent from getting low to mid-40's with careful driving. People have also remarked(which may have a bit of truth), that auto manufacturers learned how to play with EPA test conditions, so their cars got better mpg numbers, but less so in real-world conditions. Also, people, who learned careful real-world driving, closer to EPA test conditions, could remarkably get better mpg than leadfooters, even more so than past history of the differences between featherfooters & leadfooters. Websites, like Ecomodders have many people turning stunningly high mpg numbers, numbers so high they stun even me, who tries(& accomplishes) getting fairly good mpg numbers.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)