We’ve been slagging pretty hard on GM lately, so let’s try something a bit different today. Obviously, Japanese cars overall have a better than average rep for reliability (although I’m sure some would object). The object today is to identify the worst Japanese cars, primarily in terms of their reliability and/or durability, although styling, performance and other features are all part of the equation. Now I realize most of them were quite prone to rusting back in the 70s and 80s, so that’s probably a pretty universal quality. The goal is to create a “10 Worst Japanese Cars” list.
One important caveat: Please stick to the actual cars and their issues, keep it civil, and let’s not get into stereotyping their drivers or into related politics. The topic itself should have plenty of scope without diverging needlessly. Thanks.
Most early – 80s Nissans – Pulsar , Langley , etc. Was never fond of that 120Y either….
I kinda liked the old ugly Datsuns of the 70s. They ran and handled surprisingly well maybe because they looked so bad…especially once they started rusting, which they did quite a lot of.
The Datsun 120Y was extremely reliable. You could thrash the crap out of it and even get it to 100mph and it would survive. Damned ugly though. When I was in Zimbabwe in 2000 I saw tons of 120Ys on the road in Bulawayo. Couldn’t believe it. Like going back in time. They were everywhere. And in good nick.
These were probably manufactured beyond the date in the rest of the world for this area, This is pretty common in developing countries, VW did it in south america, Fiat in Turkey, and I am sure in alot of other countries.
They were probably in good nick, because they weren’t actually old.
My best car ever was a $ 40 120 Y wagon, named Dirk (after the big D on the steering wheel)
Dirk”s locks did not work, Dirk Always hauled British car engines and parts for my and my friends exotic but Always broken English cars and sportscars, and Dirk never failed to start with a foot of snow on its hood, other then my dad’s 2200 Princess HLS or our neighbour’s Rover whom Dirk had to jumpstart every morning.
Dirk was never moody, needed zilch maintenance and did its job for over a year and a half, driven by my entire flock of friends.
Dirk died when one of them got drunk behind the wheel and drove Dirk right through a red brick wall.
My cheapest and BEST car ever !
I don’t know a whole lot about Japanese cars. I will stick to one model that I do know a little about.
Early 80s Toyota Celica Supra.
First, it was not a bad car. In fact I actually like it. However…
It was considered an alternative to a Ford Mustang, Chevy Camaro, or Nissan Z. It actually had equally poor fuel mileage as the alternatives with less performance and the purchase price was not attractive for what you got. So what caused it to become so popular? I don’t see how a comparison shopper could ever choose it.
You’re talking about the 1981-85 version I take it? Considering the performance of the Camaro, Mustang, and Z in the early 80’s, I doubt the Supra was that far behind. Compared to the 4-cyl Mustang or Camaro, they were far ahead. Plus distinctive styling and far better build quality, and I presume better handling than the Camaro or Mustang. So, even if you might lose a drag race to a turbo Mustang or Z, or a V8 Camaro, it could still be quite the compelling choice I’d think!
Well, I had to look up the years because I could not remember them. The car I had in mind I guess was 1978-1981, according to wikipedia. I thought this one was in production a little later than that. The design seems to have started out ok. The right size and shape and all…a lean no-nonsense look. But the car is just a little bit too heavy and the engine just a little too weak and the price a little too high. Toyotas always were heavier than they looked like they should’ve been.
The first, A40 Celica Supra/XX was a lazy thing. The 2.6- and 2.8-liter versions were slow enough that the even less powerful 2-liter JDM models were probably pretty miserable.
Wikipedia doesn’t have correct information, most of the time… there were NO 1978 Supras… the 1st year for the Supra was 1979.
I don’t think that in the eyes of the consumer it was really an alternative to those muscle cars. I think the press may have portrayed it that way, but those who bought one were just looking for a sporty Japanese car. I had an ’83 Celica (not Supra) and, rust notwithstanding, it was one of my favorites.
OK
So you are telling me Supra buyers were too dumb(or closed minded) to do any comparison shopping then? They just wanted a Sports car with the word “Toyota” on it. Never mind that a V8 Mustang with twice the engine and acceleration got the same gas mileage. I actually like the look and design of the early 80s Supra but the performance is too low and the price too high as compared to the competition.
One word: reliability.
one word
rustbucket
Mustangs have been in my family for years, and I am of the opinion that a V8 Mustang is one of the most reliable cars you can buy. My dad’s owned an ’88, a ’99, and a ’12, and they’ve all been almost trouble-free. And they don’t rust badly if you take decent care of them, even in Michigan.
I confess I quite liked the Celica Supra,another car I’ve never thought about til now and realise it’s a very long time since I last saw one
Toyotas were rustbuckets in the 80’s, I think that’s what he was saying. Mustangs weren’t great as far as rust goes but they weren’t bad compared to anything else back then.
I liked the 1982-1986 Mustang LX 5.0 5speed notchback. It was the best deal for the money of any performance car available and it looked pretty good and could be made to handle pretty good. It was reliable and got good mileage for its engine size.
It said “TOYOTA” on it, that’s why. I wanted one badly, but didn’t have the means. Settled for the Corolla GT-S instead. Didn’t really have to settle much.
I had a girlfriend with a 81 Datsun 510 Hatchback. Rust rust rust… in Louisiana! There were actually two of those in our high school parking lot. I did take the initiative to patch the two holes in the roof of her car so she wouldn’t get wet when it rained. I think the final straw for that car was when one of the lower control arm bushings gave way (or something like that).
Wow, rust holes through the roof?
Why not? My dad’s ’74 Vega GT’s roof rusted out 😀 !
Japanese cars up through the mid 1980s would rust if parked next to a garden hose. Roof holes were very common on these in warm, salt-air tropical locales like Guam and Hawaii . . . . . .
Unfortunately I haven’t yet owned a technically bad Japanese car. As for ugliness, the ’70s Subaru Leon, Datsun F10, & Toyota Tercel L10 rank high .
Datsun 120Y F11 was certainly a minger.
A truly horrid car even before they started to rust
Any number of Suzuki’s halfhearted attempts to make a compelling car for the US market might be worthy of the list, as none ever seemed to hit the mark. The Aerio might have been an okay little runabout, and the Kizashi actually had a lot of potential but the damage was already done. Most of their earlier attemps were both lamentable and forgettable.
The 80’s/early 90’s Swift wasn’t that bad, either, but was so overshadowed by the Geo Metro-badged variant that it might as well have been invisible.
The cars that ruined Suzuki’s US prospects were the Verona and Forenza. They weren’t actually Japanese cars though. They were Daewoos from Korea. The Forenza was a rebadged Daewoo Lacetti, just as the Chevrolet Cruze is a rebadged Daewoo Lacetti today. Fortunately for Chevrolet, their buyers’ expectations weren’t as high.
+1
Yep. The Forenzas were a pretty sorry excuse for a mid-2000s car. They hit beater status on the roads lightning fast, about as quickly as Chevy Aveos did (fitting I guess).
I always kind of liked the Verona though, mainly for the the bizarre factor of having a straight six engine in a ’00s mid-size sedan. (cool, but… wtf?) Pretty sure it’s the only modern Camcord-class car that came with one.
Suzuki X-90?
They had weird names in the UK Suzuki Baleno! Baleno sounds like something you caught from a fling with a sailor
Isn’t it a type of whale?
hehe.. yep! yer have the baleeno, the spermo, the greato, the blueo, and the righto ..all whaleso every one
Kisashi is a decent car. Oddly enough suzuki was supposed to have pulled out of the whole north american market yet the local dealer (Halifax, Nova Scotia) has a bunch of 15 suzuki models on the lot. They must not have got the memo..
I put a vote in for the Datsun F-10.
wow! i love it!
F-10 (Cherry in other markets) . . . . . UGLEEEEEE – but – drivetrain was pretty robust (a sideways, OHV Nissan Four – descendant of a BMC four).
The F-10 immediately came into my mind. How could Nissan follow up with its home run 510 with such a string of abberations?
Different engineering team?
I’d say the Datsun F10 deserves a spot on that list based on the fact that they had to install one of those fans usually installed on the dash of cars to blow air over the carb to prevent the fuel from boiling in the carb in traffic or after you shut down on even moderately warm days. The F10 also earns a high score in the ugliness dept. It does get an A rating for being the second easiest clutch to replace on an automobile just behind the Honda 600. The NIssan Van and its similar problem with engine compartment heat, at least in the US versions, that led to them being recalled and crushed should also earn it a spot on that list.
If rust is considered then just about every Japanese vehicle from the 70’s should qualify though in my experience Toyota cars weren’t as bad as those from Honda and Datsun.
Suzuki Samurai – for obvious reasons
Toyota Echo – goofy styling and a sales disaster
Mitsubishi Endeavor – sales flop, odd styling, underpowered, lack of updates
Just off the top of my head
Conversely, the Echo was very popular in Soviet Canuckistan.
The Echo hatch (never sold in the USA) had very nice proportions, especially in 4-door hatch form. It reminded me of a Peugot. It was a complete contrast to the frumpy styling of the sedan.
http://www.autos.ca/first-drives/first-drive-2004-echo-hatchback/
Hmm I didn’t know the echo was a sales disaster, since they seem quite common in Canada. Yeah we’re 90% the same, but the 10% that’s different is REALLY different.
I’ll vote for the 1970 Toyota Crown. A handsome car, but the only car in my extended family where someone had a flat tire, the lug nuts were rusted on and all 4 studs snapped off, leaving them VERY stranded at the side of the road.
From Wikipedia, here are the sales stats for the U.S.
“United States
2000 – 48,876
2001 – 42,464
2002 – 30,859
2003 – 26,167
2004 – 3,899
2005 – 1,544” (still produced for the 2005 model year; not carryover ’04s)
Maybe “disaster” was a poor choice of word, but comparing these to what a larger, more expensive Corolla sold, it was pretty bad. Also, its successor, the Yaris, sold 70,308 U.S. sales in 2006.
Interesting, couldn’t find any CDN sales data on the Echo, but at a glance first year Yaris sales were 1/3 of the USA and we have 1/10th the population.
Yeah it’s a challenge convincing us Americans to buy small cars. It’s hard to explain, but I guess when you’re used to a car, it’s hard to go smaller. I’m 5’7″, 125lbs, and single, so space is no issue for me. That said, I’m driving a mid-size car and at this point would never buy a compact car. It’s just a personal thing, but I feel like many people tend to feel similar.
It helps if the small car is sporty and/or cute and the Echo really wasn’t either. Looking like a dumpling did it no favors.
Yeah I always thought the Echo fit the definition of “clown car”
Toyota also made the front-seat area of the Yaris *conspicuously* roomy, enough to make both an immediate and a lasting impression (the latter to the Corolla’s detriment…)
Home as well as US-market needs probably fed into that, given the tax advantages of a keicar you need to give people a reason to trade up to a B-segment, but it certainly helped here.
That still wouldn’t make it a bad car. Also the Yaris/Belta focus wasn’t the U.S. it was and still very successful in countries of Southeast Asia, and mine, Chile. It has lived on for some three generations, and now has different bodies in different markets,
Hi Ramon. Totally off this subject but I would be very grateful if you could clear something up for me! I have been to Santiago 4 times and always stay at the San Cristobal Tower – I get them to send a car to pick me up at the airport and it is usually…..a Samsung! Looks like a KATHE Nissan, but it definately says Samsung. I have never seen Samsung cars anywhere else! Do you know what this is based on and what is the link between Samsungand Nissan/Renault? Actually, I just got back to Australia two days go, after another ride in a Samsung in Santiago!
Hi Ashley! The answer is yes, there were Samsung cars. These were based on the Nissan Maxima, and called Samsung SQ5. They sold well here.
After the Asian Crisis Samsung decided to sell their car business to Renault Nissan. Their cars were still Korean-made versions of Nissan cars, the most popular here the Renault Samsung SM3, based on the Nissan Bluebird Sylphy, and mostly used as taxis. They are in some countries sold as Nissan. For a while, a Nissan version was sold at the same time here, as Almera, but they are way less common.
The successor of the SQ5 is the SM5, and its more expensive version, the SM7, both are basically the same car, a Nissan Teana made in Korea. Both are sold in Chile (the Teana was also offered but very few were sold).
All these Renault Samsung cars have seen updated versions in Korea, now paired to Renault cars. But Renault Nissan has decided to sell these as Renault here, and has kept the Renault Samsung brand here for the older, cheaper, Nissan based models.
I’ve always felt a big reason these cars failed was they were just too bare bones for the times; power windows, locks, or keyless entry simply were not options (at least in the US). As pricey as they were, this was not the case for the previous Tercel.
The Echo did not fail. It sold well all around the world.
Echo was Toyota’s Henry J or perhaps AMC Pacer.
Echo was odd but the people that owned really liked them. I knew a girl in college who told me that you would be surprised at just how many people you could fit in one. Always thought of them as a Tercel with a cuter name.
Hahaha, they’re called the Platz here in the home market (I live in Japan). You see them from time to time, but every time I see that name in chrome letters across its trunk all I can think of is farts.
“Suzuki Samurai – for obvious reasons”
Inexpensive, lightweight, dependable and capable little 4×4 that can scrap offroad with the Jeeps. Easy to maintain and modify, and has a huge following today.
Nope, sorry Bud. Try again on that one.
I agree the Sami was a good vehicle.
+1
I owned two of them (a story I’ll tell one of these days), and loved both. I drove them ‘vigorously,’ and they never felt tippy at all.
+1
I nominate the Datsun B-210…but maybe that’s because a girlfriend had one and I had to fix it whenever it went awry, which was often.
It was also ugly. The Datsun, not the girlfriend.
The “Early 80s Toyota Celica Supra” caught my eye. My sister-in-law had one. I can’t give it bad marks because it gave her little or no trouble at all for years in Pennsylvania, until it finally rusted apart. But I blame that on Pennsylvania, not the car, whose lifetime before turning into brown flakes was about averagel though since it was PAINTED brown to begin with, the rust didn’t show!
The Toyota Avensis 2.2 D4D D-Cat. Turbo, head gaskets, SCV-valves, injectors. Lots of these engines had to be rebuilt or replaced prematurely.
Toyota and state of the art (common-rail) car-diesel engines just don’t go very well together.
The Toyota Avensis 2.2 D4D is the car of choice in Mauritania, they are brought in the country from all over Europe, these are considered the most sturdy cars to endure harsh driving conditions,
The 2.2 D4D D-Cat was the 177 hp high-performance version. At its introduction it was the most powerful 4 cylinder car diesel. The standard 2.2 D4D had 150 hp.
The most common Toyota car diesel was and is the 2.0 D4D, meanwhile lagging far behind when it comes to power and torque numbers. Several Toyota models in Europe have a BMW-diesel now or are getting one in the near future.
Also, the Avensis… Made in England!
….and designed by Toyota’s design studio in France. At least, gen 2 and 3 (the current model).
I don’t know about the first gen Avensis, which was the successor of the Carina E.
Wasn’t the Suzuki Samurai supposed rollover problem another hoax by the media or Consumer Reports?
I don’t think it was a hoax, but I think CU overstated things. The Samurai was a light, small, high-clearance Jeep-like vehicle, of course it’s more likely to roll! So is an overloaded F-150; drivers should be aware of their vehicles’ limitations.
IIRC, the test procedure was a bit on the rigged side, not inconsistent with other examples of CR testing to a desired outcome.
Mitsubishi Diamante
I still cannot believe they made them up to 2005
+1
I don’t know if they were all bad cars, but the worst car I’ve ever owned in terms of the problems it gave me was an ’88 Toyota Celica ST. Granted in was 12 years old when I got it, but still, it had less than 130k on the clock. My Dad’s crappy Skylark made it 216k in the same time frame and was mostly trouble-free.
Problems I had:
-Constantly slipped out of 5th gear
-sunroof leaked freezing cold water on my head whenever I took a turn
-heater core shot
-accelerator would stick
-blew threw ignition coils like a drunk through a six pack
-engine ran so hot, you could fry an egg on the hood in January
-embarrassingly hard starts
-accelerator would stick, forcing me to apply brakes very often , causing fade
What you describe here are not uncommon issues for a 12 year old car with high mileage. You did not know the history of the car when you bought it.
In the case of your dad’s Buick, you knew the history. Makes a BIG difference.
Really? We’ve never had any problems with our 2000 Diamante. It’s the best, most reliable car we’ve ever owned. Never let us down.
I came here to say Mitsubishi, although I was having trouble limiting it to one specific model. I was going to say Eclipse because there were so many of them a few years ago, and now, here where rusts never even wakes up, there are none. However the Diamanté is a good answer too. I had one as a rental once and not only was it burning oil, the interior was breaking apart.
To reinforce the argument for (against?) Mitsubishi, here’s a link to the “Top 111 consumer complaints against Mitsubishi”
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/mitsubishi.html
To finish the argument my Japanese wife works for Mitsubishi International (separate from the Car Division) and could get us a pretty good discount- except she refuses to own one.
Good question. A few that come to mind:
Datsun F-10, most certainly.
Early Mazda pickups, including the Ford Courier.
Mazda RX-2, beyond the engine, did anyone stop and notice how bad the rest of the car was?
Though not a bad car, the Datsun 610 has a certain 510-meets-Gran Torino quality about it. Not good!
For styling, the Datsun B-210 fastback that a former supervisor bought. It was pale metallic green with an off-white vinyl top. It had tan seats and door panels, and black instrument panel and steering wheel. It had wheel covers with a honeycomb-looking pattern. A remarkably ugly piece.
Japan Inc should read this column and smile.
Gather a bunch of hard-hitting gearheads and ask them to name some bad Japanese cars.
Well, there’s … uh, no. And then there was the … nah, not all that bad. How about? Misadvertised but not a bad car. We can all agree on … Nope.
Apart from the overarching theme of rust, that is.
I am inclined to agree with this statement. As bad as a lot of the cars mentioned might be, there’s no Landcrab, X-body or Vega type fiasco any of us can point to.
They also weren’t selling in nearly the numbers of American cars at the time, largely due to chintzy sheetmetal, cramped interiors, and a small dealer network.
Nissan bought back their combustable vans at one time. That seems worse than anything I can recall from the Big 3. Toyota trucks became known for sludge and frame rot at one point. There are others too, they just didn’t get much publicity due to their small market share at the time. Contrast that to the acceleration issue once Toyota gained popularity here.
80’s Subarus with awd. Traction would break loose entirely without warning in a corner. They may still be this way, but these days it’s much harder to approach that limit.
Late 70’s Mazda 323(?); I’m thinking of the immediate predecessor to the GLC model. Rwd sedan, 4 cylinder. It was so bad I’ve almost completely blotted it out of my memory.
And the early 90’s (?) 3 cylinder Subaru Justy (though I didn’t experience this one myself).
That would be the Mazda 808.
“808” – that was it, thanks. In fairness, mine was significantly used before it was inflicted upon me.
A question. Was the AWD system in those old Subarus supposed to be activated on roads? I remember some old AWD cars advised to engage it only on rough terrain.
I do remember reading in the early Subarus that the AWD was not for use in dry pavement
Yes, the pre-Legacy Subarus had 4wd without a centre differential, although I suppose there may be exceptions.
And many had a dual range system. Meaning its actually a proper 4×4 system….it just works ‘backwards’ from traditional system in that its fwd biased as opposed to rwd.
Agree on the Justy – had a 90 4 door with less than 100K when the engine started failing. And, it was miserable to drive for commuting … my previous car, an 82 Datsun 210, was much easier and comfortable to drive, even with it’s vinyl interior compared to the Justy’s cloth – mostly due to very harsh ride. On top of that, I was expect 40+mpg and it barely topped 30 … I took a loss just to get rid of it (and ended up with the best car of my life as a repacement, an ’82 Accord).
I nominate the rotary-engined Mazda Cosmo (original) for most time spent off the road for breaking down. It also had miserable acceleration for a sports car.
+1, yes also a poor all around car.
Datsun F 10 and the late 70s US spec 200SX. Those bumpers were pathetic. Also early 70s Toyota Carina.
Any Mitsubishi; by the time they got to the repair shop, it was always 3 or more things wrong with it. Carb, electrical, and some kind of mechanical issue was the usual trio. You’d find the obvious one early, tell the customer what and how much. Then after that was done, you’d notice something else, call the customer and get that done. And then a third time for good luck.
This was stuff like a carb needle and seat leaking massive amounts of fuel. You could look down into the carb and see it dripping. After you fixed that and it still didn’t run right, more time and find the intake manifold gasket that was leaking, which kind of compensated for the carb flooding, Hated seeing them come in, because it was always going to be a struggle with the owner…Japanese carbs in general were not the best, Mitsubishi ran a Mikuni on the 2.6 that used a wax pellet to open the choke. When it quit working, it was $150 for the top of the carb that contained the wax pellet. And that was 25 years ago money….
Yep…My Mom’s 1979 Plymouth Arrow. Which was a a captive import from Mitsubishi. Stalled and/or hard to start at the most inconvenient times. Also went through starters like crazy!
Had an ’81 Plymouth Champ, bought used in 1985, based on rave reviews by Car and Driver. But these were not Civics, and fell apart like a Vega.
Mitsubishi’s had its fair share of duds, but in General, buyers could count of them to be up to date and assembled well, even if they didn’t match your average Honda for powertrain durability. Their troubles today are a legacy of their late start in the US market as an independent brand, along with the Asian financial crisis of 1998.
You know, most of you are commenting on appearance not performance. It is hard to criticize the reliability of any Japanese cars in recent times but it is easy to criticize styling. However, most Japanese cars were way ahead of European and American cars in terms of interior styling. For example, take a 90’s BMW and compare it to any Japanese 90’s car, of any brand including Diahatsu (bare-bones auto maker) and the Japanese car will win out in leaps and bounds over the BMW’s aircraft cockpit looking ugly interior.
Growing up we had an 89 Mazda 323. Six months into our ownership, the transmission stopped working.
Also had a friend’s 84 Camry break a timing belt with less than 70,000 miles.
It’s supposed to be changed every 10 years or 100,000 km.
I know, but these cars have such a reputation for standing up to abuse and neglected maintenance. 70,000 miles is just over 112,000 Kilometers. I have seen a lot of them go to 150,000+ miles on the original timing belt without failure.
NOT timing belts. NEVER defer a timing belt. If you have seen a timing belt go 150,000 miles, that was a very lucky car owner.
Just so ! .
I have taken off the belt cover on a few elderly engines to find maybe 50 % of the belt left , a wonder it handn’t snapped .
-Nate
At that time, in the US, the recommendation was 60K or 5 years.
Datsun 120-Y was hideous, but reliable, until the rust claimed it.
Suzuki X90 can also be nominated for its comedy value.
How about the early Honda Accord and Civic with the CVCC engines. The first was bad, and I was stupid enough to then go buy the Accord. My ex had a ’72 Vega, which was worse, but not by much. I’ll never understand the love for these significantly flawed Hondas.
Definitely. The vacuum diagram makes me want to run quickly before I trip over it!
Looks like a wring diagram for the Space Shuttle 🙂 !
Piece of Cake. I nominate:
Nissan Vanette. So hot, it was on fire!
Almost any DSM product. Eagle Talon/Plymouth Laser, mostly.
1976 Honda Accord. Didn’t they recall these when we ran out of Bondo?
Almost any DSM product.
2004 Infiniti QX56. “I’ve got no brakes” edition!
Almost any DSM product.
1994 Mazda 626. Your transmission is bad? We’ll replace the speedo gears!
Those are the ones that come to mind with major problems. The ones that I just plain don’t like:
Suzuki X-90.
Hondas.
Chevrolet Sprint.
Hondas.
Toyota Paseo
My nomination is the Isuzu Rodeo. It was a credible contender early in the SUV craze, and sold pretty well. These were all over Indiana, having been built in Lafayette. The things just never developed a good reputation. They seemed to be a bit brittle with lots of little niggling problems. They sort of turned into the SUV you could buy relatively cheap used, sort of an SUV for those who couldn’t afford the better ones.
And their even more obscure twin, the Honda Passport. The Passport didn’t do Honda much good, selling poorly and dragging Honda’s overall quality ratings down.
Plus, dealer service sucked because these things were so foreign to Honda techs.
Yep…the only “Honda” not covered by extended service or sold as certified pre owned. Warned by many not to buy if looking for reliability because it is a Honda in name only.
The Passport was a bit of an identity crisis car. It was a Isuzu product badged as a Honda that was made in a Subaru factory in Indiana(or so says the placard on the driver’s doorway on the 1995 Passport at that mom and pop dealership where I got several cars from
Ironically I see more Passports on the road in maryland then I do rodeos
Regardless of their cars’ actual pedigrees, I suspect “Honda” owners much better care of their Passports (and Acura SLXs, a rebadged Trooper) than typical Isuzu buyers.
True. There is a very well preserved Passport in my neighborhood, looks brand new.
230k on my current daily driver, 1999 Isuzu Rodeo with a 5 speed manual. It’s proven to be a very dependable little truck; great in the snow. I don’t plan on quitting driving it anytime soon.
I nominate the Buick/Opel by Isuzu (actual name) Buick sold them, but cared very little about servicing them.
Later Isuzu had their own dealerships with the Impulse; GM World car related to the Chevette, but with a Turbo. A co-worker bought two brand new. Both blew out the rear differential within months. Dealer was a former lawn equipment dealer with no real service department.
Datsun F10…. Probably reasonably reliable but ugly, especially the grill and headlamps
I know I’ll get flamed for this but I nominate Toyota Tacomas. Good trucks with the worst frames in the business. Hard core Taco lovers love to point out that Dana manufactured the frames and “it’s all their fault”, but those frames were built to Toyota’s specs (and I know that Dana took some of the blame for the problem). Dana also manufactures frames for the Big 3’s trucks and I’d be willing to bet even Nissan’s but their frames don’t seem to disintegrate. The recall was initially for 1995-2004 models but now they’re doing up to and including 2007 models. And before anyone calls me a “hater” (oh, how I loathe that infantile term) I would have no problem at all owning a Taco, they’ve got robust drivetrains that’ll last just about forever. It’s just that their frames and our lovely northeast Ohio climate don’t get along at all.
Edit: Here’s a link that say’s even 2008’s are now suspect, and that AFTER the initial recall was announced:
http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1092814_2005-2008-toyota-tacoma-could-have-frame-rust-may-get-free-fix
Not to pile on but here’s another climate related recall on Taco’s:
http://blog.caranddriver.com/690000-toyota-tacomas-recalled-for-leaf-springs-that-could-snap-damage-fuel-tank-and-brake-line/
I just went to the Toyota dealership today to have an oil change on my 1993 SR5 pickup and they were cleaning/rustproofing a frame on a 2007 Tacoma. I thought the problem stopped after 2004 for the Tacoma and after the 1st gen Tundra, but apparently not… At least, they seem to take it seriously and they fix the problem… They did replace the frame on a friend’s 2000 Tundra a few years ago and the new one is still OK. They clean and rustproof the frames that aren’t rusted through and they replace those that are.
Still, I think I’ll drive my 21 years old pickup a few more years!
I have to agree with this one. I respect the Hilux, but why in hades does the Tacoma have a separate frame design?
To add to the above, on my experiences driving one belonging to my elderly neighbor, i found little apart from convenient size to recommend one over my F-150s. There was very little difference in mileage or handling or ride comfort, and I found the four different types and textures of dash plastic very much at odds with the admirably inoffensive interior design of cars such as the Avalon.
This is a good nomination.
What was that small Nissan that was done as a co-venture with Alfa Romeo? First-generation Cherry/Alfa Romeo Arna? That was fairly notorious.
Yes, the Nissan Cherry Europe. Imagine the style and looks of an Alfa with the reliability and build quality of a Nissan. That’s what it could have been. Unfortunately, they decided to go the other way; style of a Nissan Cherry with Alfa reliability. A bizarre attempt to get around European import quotas if I remember correctly
The Subaru 360? Sold my Malcolm Bricklin in America where they lacked performance and safety measures expected by that market. Sales were much less than expected with many tossed into the sea and a number converted into a buggy type machine for use at a driving school.
Or the 1958 Toyopet that was incapable of climbing hills in California?
The Honda S500/600 has a similar story. Could not cope with the hills in San Francisco so not sold in the US market but did reach Canada. Those Toyopets were sold in Canada too. Apparently the world thinks we don’t have hills.
Su-ba-ru? Wow!
That’s the one I was thinking of. Not sure the Honda 600 was great either. The early Mazda RX2/3/4 and the Rotary Power pickup’s were not reliable engine wise.
Mitsubishis, they coast[ed] on “being Japanese” and get import buyers looking for a ‘bargain’. Resorted to ”no payments for a year” deals to get suckers. But their sales slide is ‘karma’, IMHO.
After them are Isuzu, they ran out of here with tail between legs. Again, saying ‘buy our cars, they are imports’ tag.
Datsun-now Nissan. B 210-any model. Cheap-and it showed. Started to rust in less than two years. Garbage!
I remember seeing those things with bubbling fenders shortly after they were introduced and wondered what Datsun was making them from, recycled beer cans 🙂 ?
A neighbor had a `72 or `73 B 210 fastback.In less than two and a half years, he had an eighteenn inch eaten through rust cancer rot from the left “b” pillar continuing to the rear of the car. Bondo-ed it over to the end, then the other side of the car started to rust in the same place. That pretty much soured him on Japanese cars.
I remember one model in particular that actually looked better AFTER the rust started to set in.
An old GF had a brown and gold “Honey Bee”. Looked like a gilded turd until the rust added camo and it blended into the background of everything else…
The pictured 120Y is one of the worst for rust that’s for sure! But it was a bulletproof engine, slick gearbox, and a ton-up car out of the box! They were as nice as anything in the era to drive too.. just no body treatment for rust whatsoever ..brand new out of the showroom they were already rusting. . . .
Haven’t sampled Japanese wares of the 60s or 70s personally. I had a coworker with a 76 Accord that the tops of the front fenders rusted through in 4 years, and by then it burned a quart of oil ever 500 miles, but the concept was excellent and the Accord survived and flourished in the US.
Ditto the Subaru 360 and Honda AN600. Neither were bad enough to kill the company’s prospects in the US.
Total market failure has to be the standard. An Austin Marina/Daewoo whatever level of failure.
I second the nomination above for the Buick “Opel by Isuzu”. I remember the tone of the road test in Motor Trend: beyond disappointment, approaching open hostility.
In spite of the leg up by GM, first as a Buick/Opel, then as the Geo Spectrum, and on it’s own as the I-Mark, it failed. It took real talent to fail with a small Japanese car in the late 70s/80s, but Isuzu succeeded.
I’m with Roger and the others on the X-90.
Don’t know about how it drives or its reliability, but the 1947 Toyota SA gets my vote for most hit with the ugly stick.
I think it kinda looks cool, like an 87 typeTatra mated with a Chrysler Airflow coupe.
Good description!
Looks to me like a Beetle sucking a lemon. Or kissing a Zephyr.
The offspring of a Zephyr and a Beetle.
Early 80’s 210. Absolute rust bucket in 4 years. Slow – to the point of being downright dangerous.
Guess it all depends on your perspective. I learned to drive with a diet of old (mid forties) cars. Then had a string of cars that were affordable for a young sailor.
With that in mine I didn’t consider any of the Japanese products to be bad. My nephew had a trouble prone early toyota and I had an rx3 that I don’t consider because of the rotary. From my own experience the Nissan NAPS engines in trucks had extremely fragile head gaskets thanks to the aluminum head/steel block and very little meat where they join. Overheating sounds the death knell for them.
To me, a japanese car or truck has always meant 300k with some minor repairs along the way. I now drive a Nissan and a Toyota and don’t consider them to be perfect. Just the best available for your $.
just about any Mitsubishi
Subarus and their head gasket failures
Honda Odyssey and Accord V6 transmissions
early Mazda RX7s
Toyota Tundras rusting in half
any 3.0L V6 Toyota
late model Nissan trucks don’t seem to be holding up very well either
Ah yes… the dreaded Toyota 3.0L sludge motor. I loved how Toyota blamed the owners for lax maintenance when they were actually following the owner’s manual’s instructions to the “t”!
Chrysler did the same thing on the 2.7. And of course, they were right. All the failed 2.7 motors I ever saw were not properly maintained.
The absolute worst were the rotary Mazdas of the early ’70s. We had the misfortune to own a ’74 Rx-4 wagon. Its myriad problems, high cost of parts and inability to find anyone willing to rebuild the engine, once it inevitably failed, were a calamity that is still remembered with horror 35 years later in my family. We ended up rebuilding the engine ourselves – in the street, in the middle of winter. I had a short story about this published a few years ago. It can be read here:
http://mystory.hias.org/en/stories/view/index/identity/38
Other horrors I used to own were two Mitsubishi products, a ’89 Colt Vista and a ’90 Mitsubishi Sigma.
The Colt Vista was a crappy underpowered little thing that had all sorts of mechanical issues until the engine failed. Its versatile interior was its only saving grace.
The Sigma was like owning a spaceship – utterly futuristic with all the luxury bells and whistles, but impossible to live with in real life situations. Parts were pure unobtainium – everyone was certain it was a Galant, which it wasn’t. By the time I managed to convince a mechanic that Galant parts wouldn’t work, I was facing special orders from Japan and prices about three times the amount I paid to repair the equivalent issue on my Chevy or Oldsmobile. Great car when it ran, but I think either a V12 Jaguar or a Yugo would have been more reliable. It did have an amazing factory sound system with volume controls on the steering wheel, the first I ever saw on any car. And it ate front axles at the rate of twice a year.
Surprisingly, my mom’s ’89 Plymouth Colt wagon was a great little car, utterly reliable. So I cannot condemn Mitsubishi across the board.
The saddest was my ’83 Toyota Supra. I loved that car, but it rusted away faster than anything I ever owned.
1998-02 Honda Accord (w/automatic trans)
1993-02 Mazda 626 (w/automatic trans)
1987-89 Nissan Stanza
1979-82 Datsun 310
1979-82 Toyota Corona
My Top 10 List:
Subaru Justy—A truly terrible car that most people either never knew existed or if they did have tried to forget. Underpowered, chintzy inside and out with a lousy ride and worse handling; anyone who drove one with a CVT transmission has painful memories of its awfulness and won’t have anything to do with a CVT ever again. Interestingly it did come in a 4WD version (and someone living in a snowy area with one of the last running examples is deeply offended by what I’ve written about it).
Datsun B-210—our first warning that something was amiss at the company that gave us the 510 & 240Z.
Datsun F10—Even though it’s already been nominated multiple times it needs to be nominated again. The yellow wagon with fake wood on the sides is the good looking one compared to its hatchback brother. Yikes!
1st generation 1970’s Datsun 200SX—Dastun’s rendition of the Pinto based 1974-1978 Mustang. The only way it looked good was when it was sitting next to an F10 in the showroom.
Mitsubishi Starion/Chrysler-Plymouth-Dodge Conquest—Fun to drive, good looking but poorly built. Later models had an automatic climate control with Peugeot-like electronics reliability.
1st and 2nd generation Mazda RX-7—These cars would also make the top 10 most fun to drive list so it is painful to also put them on this list but they were pretty temperamental in their day. Just as Citroen SM enthusiasts claim that Citroen hydraulics really aren’t that complex and some Alfisti say that the Spica mechanical fuel injection can be set up to be perfectly fine, rotary enthusiasts see no drawbacks to the RX-7, just character (which is car-guy code for unreliable). The rest of us will regularly foul spark plugs because we don’t know how to start a cold rotary engine.
Daihatsu Charade—for once truth in product naming.
Any Mitsubishi with a 3.0 Liter V6 engine—for further explanation please look in the CC archives at late 1980’s/early 1990’s Chrysler products with a Mitsubishi 3.0 Liter V6 engine.
Any Mitsubishi with a 2.6 Liter 4 cylinder engine—see early Chrysler K-cars & Minivans
Buick/Opel by Isuzu and Isuzu I-Mark—Motor Trend was right.
Top 10 worst Japanese cars: can this be in general, or for the US market? Or? We need context.
10. Nissan Altima (1998-2001): lowered the bar set by the first generation, and this car allowed Nissan to redo the vehicle completely for 2002 and move it upscale
9. Toyota Echo (US version): really? this was the best “entry-level” car Toyota could foster on us to slot below the Corolla?
8. Subaru Forester (2008 to curent): not a bad car perse, but it hurdled the Forester into generic-SUV-dom rather than the wagon-that-isn’t-an-Impreza that it should’ve been all along. I think the Levorg is the spiritual successor to the original Forester
7. Nissan Skyline crossover/Infiniti EX35/37: not necessarily a bad vehicle perse, but it just.. it didn’t fit with Infiniti’s lineup. It wasn’t practical either, and had less cargo room than a G35 and was more expensive to boot.
6. Acura ILX: again, a competent car, until you consider that a Buick Verano is a better car for less money; and thriftier too.
5. Toyota Soarer/Lexus SC430: Really? You followed up one of the best personal-luxury coupe with something that didn’t have backseats, had a leaky-roof, and a design that dated the day it rolled into showrooms. Good job, Toyota.
4. Toyota Cavalier: While not really a terrible car, it just didn’t seem to have the usual build-quality associated with the Toyota crest. Not really sure why they bothered.
3. Mitsubishi Outlander (current-generation): polarizing looks, out-of-touch option packages, and a generally steep price of entry. Not worth $35 large IMO.
2. Mitsubishi Mirage (current-generation): 74 horsepower, 13″ wheels, and only 33 mpg. oh, and it will run you about $19,000 to get one with actual comfort-options.
1. Acura ZDX: the Japanese answer to the BMW X6; hard to get in and out of for backseat passenger, terrible fuel economy (for a Honda product), and about the only vehicle I’ve seen that has orange-peel from day one.
Regarding #8, every model year 2008 on has sold more units than any year prior, so not sure what you are exactly getting at? Subaru read/heard the market, and responded appropriately. Buyers clearly don’t agree with you. What an odd inclusion…
Forester or perhaps Baja?… useless..completely useless.
Slight correction to #8: The properly proportioned Forester was made for 12 years, 1997-2008; the 2009 was the first of the newer, larger type. (We have an ’06 5-speed and an ’07 automatic, and love them dearly. No steel-roofed car ever had better visibility in any direction – even upward, with the huge sunroof.)
Toyota Cavalier is actually a Chevrolet it only wears Toyota badging
Toyota Cavalier NOT a Japanese car… it was an American Cavalier, exported to Japan, and with Toyota emblems.
What a friggin joke… kinda like a 94-08 Mazda pickup, that was really a Ford Ranger.
From experience, may I nominate the ST140 Toyota Corona as all-time worst? You Americans got the first Camry instead of this heap. Be VERY thankful! This Corona was RWD, but had a larger body than its predecessor on a short-wheelbase, narrow-track chassis. it always felt unstable, to me.
My wife had one of these when we married. I had a ten year old Ford Cortina. The Cortina was smaller outside, roomier inside, handled heaps better (but rode worse), was faster and more economical that her new Corona. For those who don’t know, the Cortina was no benchmark car in the first place. Ten years progress to produce an inferior car to a model Ford had been selling from 1971 to 74?
Oh, what? A feeling? Toyota? Don’t believe it – no feelings in the ST140!
NZ got the FWD Corona OZ was the odd one out in still getting RWD Coronas thru till 87, A friend had a 86 wagon the only issue she ever had with it in 360,000kms was the clutch master cylinder failed at 360,000kms and a right bastard they are to replace, with the 2.4 engine they were pretty much indestructable nothing much to drive but they kept going forever.
That’s sad, because I owned the previous generation the 1980-82 RT130 “wedge” Toyota Corona… that had the bulletproof 22R. Mine was an 81 Corona Deluxe model.
Ran like a Swiss watch, and the A/C was ICE cold, too… I sold it to some Bozo, who initially wanted to trade me a 2003 Dodge pickup 4×4 for it.
It’s kind of pathetic when someone wants to trade a 2000+ Dodge for an 80s Toyota. Dodge trucks are rubbish. lol
1970s Toyota MK11 Corona- handling on a par with the Leyland Marina.The MK11 was a nearly new car when I drove it.
Really I had one in the early 00s went really well handled ok on the Huon roads certainly no worse than Falcons of the 90s
I owned two. They handle like pigs.
Mitsubishi had some real stinkers. I’ll nominate the Mirage and “S’Coupe” or however they spelled it. Years ago a friend had the “S’Coupe”, it couldn’t have been more than five years old but had a blue haze behind it and the engine sounded like marbles in a drier.
Also, their names sucked. Mirage? Not quite as bad as Aspire or Charade but close.
Maybe you can blame the low-end buyers of those cars for not maintaining them, but it used to be that virtually every car I saw with a trail of blue smoke behind it was a Mitsubishi.
The S Coupe was a Hyundai wasn’t it?
Agree on the blue smoke issue though. Mitsubishi had big corporate culture problems with vehicle defects not being reported to the Japanese transport ministry or acted on properly that came to a head in 2000.
The Scoupe was a Hyundai, but (like the Excel it was based on) relied heavily on Mitsubishi engineering. I think the engine was a Mitsu four-banger, too.
Seems I was wrong about the name. My friend’s car was actually a “Mitsubishi Mirage S Coupe”, but it was still a piece of junk.
Echo was Toyota’s Henry J
I remember reading an Echo road test in Car & Driver, they called it a mistake.
I don’t know about that:
Highs:
Class-leading acceleration, distinctive shape, plenty of interior storage.
Lows:
Tossed around easily by crosswinds and a bit tippy in turns.
Verdict:
A useful, inexpensive, fresh-looking small sedan with Toyota reliability.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/toyota-echo-road-test
Traditionally,front wheel drive cars were adversely affected by cross winds,but back in 1965 Renault introduced the 16TL and I read that the sides of the roof were purposely designed to ameliorate that problem.The roof sides when viewed from front or back resembled the shapes of the Sydney Opera House or the front guards of a 1954 RME Riley or a MKV1 Bentley.My 1975 Renault 16TS did not suffer cross winds as less articulate front wheel drive cars did.
Front wheel drive cars tend to be more stable in cross winds due to the extra weight over the steering and driving wheels. Rear engine cars such as VW’s tend to be unstable in cross winds due to lack of weight over the front wheels.
The S’Coupe was a Hyundai.
I’ve no particular beef against Japanese cars and I can see from most of the posts that everyone else is having a problem slagging them off. Agree that the Datsun 120Y was an unusual looking car but it has a place in my heart as I learnt to drive in one back in Edinburgh in 1975.
What I do hate about Japanese cars is the stupid names they get given; some of them sound like incurable skin diseases. Honestly, who wants to runaround in a car called a Cherry?!
But cherry blossom is very prominent in Japanese culture. Perhaps a good name for the home market, but not for export.
I have to agree with you about some names though. But at least a dumb name is better than a meaningless string of alphabet soup.
Cherry? I dont remember there is a car called Cherry, but I do remember there is a Chery which is a big copycat with miserable quality.
F-10 = Cherry.
Among others – the 310 and Pulsar were also called Cherry in Japan.
They were known here as the 100A (4 door 1 litre) and the 120A (3 door hatch 1.2 litre) i think.. both were quicker than the 120Y due to body lightness ..quite rapid in the lower gears ..very very road noisy …and the 120A could be converted easily to NZ ‘SSS’ specs with triple 38mm DellOrto’s.. i did this to my canary yellow 120A (took it to a racing guru at the time called Reg Cook, and he did all the conversion work)
It became the quickest light bodied ‘Datsun’ in the country pretty much (it was not cage-equipped, so was also quite a dangerous machine to drive really quickly in ..a front end of just moderate severity would have spelt ‘curtain call’ as it was such a lightly-built car
I had a well worn 120Y Datsun it was a bomb but reliable as the sun even at the end of its natural life, New they were a good drive for the times, Ugly? yep in spades but bloody good cars.