Customer Reviews

Automotive Atrocities: The Cars We Love to Hate

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Reading this books brought back memories of the sorry excuses for cars that we spent thousands of dollars for in the 1970's-80's.

Some of the Losers from that era that were in the book in my own words:
1980 Thunderbird: Styling done by stacking 3 "Chunky" candy bars together. An insult to the 2-seat T-birds (1955,2002)
1984 Fiero: A good looking, but less practical Chevette
1982:Cadillac Cimmarron: at $12,000 Cavalier. Worst example of badge engineering.
1982-1984 Dodge Rampage: A sad excuse for an El Camino, and even sadder excuse for a pickup.
1974-78: Mustang II; The "Pintang". A heavier and slower Pinto.
They should have put this horse in the glue factory.
1980-90 Cadillacs: Standard of how not to design a car. Much worse performance and reliability than a modern Dodge Neon (which costs half as much or 1/4 as much in 2004 dollars).
1981 K-cars: Johnson&Johnson band-aid cans on wheels.
1971-1977 Chevy Vega: Set the world standard for fastest car to fall apart. Had to buy gas and oil at the same time, like a 2-stroke.

This is a very funny book. I know next to nothing about cars, but I found Eric Peter's non-stop verbal jabs at these truly terrible cars an absolute hoot. Even if, like me, paint color is the only option you select when buying a car, you'll like this book.

I've been watching the automotive industry for a very long time. I remember all of these vehicles when they were introduced and intended to be serious competitors in the market. You have to wonder what the auto execs and advertising guys were thinking - but it is fun to look back and laugh.
This book focuses on the two decades of the '70s and '80s, although there certainly are vehicles from earlier and later decades that could also qualify as atrocities.
And there are some vehicles included that I personally would not have selected - some that were just bland and boring or that were subsequently discovered to have excessive mechanical problems. Clearly it is mostly about preposterous styling and vehicles that were poorly matched to American automotive needs and desires.
But overall, this is one of the must enjoyable automotive books in my library - light reading and fun!

Most automotive books I review are serious...mainly they're historical or technical. What we all need, sometimes, is humor and that's where <u>Automotive Atrocities</u>: The Cars We Love to Hate comes in.


Automakers have flimflammed an unsuspecting public with plenty of bad and/or laughable cars over the years. Millions have been sucked into buying mistakes-on-wheels. Millions more have drive these cars, which, after the new-car smell is gone, reveal themselves to be truly atrocious automobiles.



<u>Automotive Atrocities</u> is a totally awful collection of fake muscle cars, clown-car compacts, faux "luxury" cars, sales disasters and other truly disgusting and/or ill-conceived four-wheeled follies. This book gives the motoring public the last laugh as everyone's (well..almost everyone's) least-favorite cars are skewered, big-time.



Indeed, just about every car in this book is one we love to hate but most of them are, also, cars we all have joked about and the others are just pathetic or weird. I mean...who can keep a straight face while reading about Yugos, Renault Fuegos, Daihatsu Charades, Ford Mustang II King Cobras or AMC Pacers. Then there are (pathetic) Camaros with four-cylinder engines and (weird) Zil limousines.



Courtesy of Eric Peters, who's written about cars for 11 years and, currently, is an automotive correspondent for America OnLine, Netscape and CompuServe, we get the stupidest, funniest, most ridiculous and the most atrocious cars of all time. Peters mixes an often sarcastic, humorous style with some history, not too much techie talk and some good fun and comes up with a book that is both amusing and educational.



At times, <u>Automotive Atrocities</u> is even provoking. For example, Peters claims the California-only, 1980 Corvette 305 is an "automotive atrocity". While I like this book, I am in complete disagreement on this issue. Clearly, Mr. Peters knows enough about Vettes to be dangerous...or maybe a Porsche marketing guy. Peters claims the Vette with the 305 is an atrocity because it was a poor performer...which it was. But, there are mitigating circumstances. First, all cars of that period, performance or otherwise, were slugs. Author Peters, an admitted third generation Pontiac Firebird owner (I mean, hey, the guy owns a car with a big freakin' chicken on the hood), was unaware that 1980 Corvette LG4 was actually an automative milestone, not an atrocity. It was the first production GM car to have digital engine controls and those controls gave this car's 305 (which existed solely because of California is the land of environmental whackos) only 10 less horsepower than the engine used elsewhere in the U.S. which was 45 cubic inches larger. This car began the EFI revolution in performance automobiles which made performance cars of today, such as the Z06, possible.



Another car Eric Peters incorrectly terms atrocious is the Chevy Cosworth Vega. Yeah, the Vega's aluminum block/iron head engine had a lot of durability problems....but mainly if it was not cared-for properly. Overheat those Vega motors and they became wheezing, oil-burning clunkers. The most interesting thing about the "Cos Vega" is that it was the first GM car and the first modern American car to have electronic fuel injection. Yep, a vast majority of the cars on the road in America, today, use port fuel injection which is similar in design and operating principle to what was first introduced on the 1975 Cosworth Vega. Some of Peter's comments about the engine's durability might be a tiny bit exaggerated and his irrelevant statement that the engine put out 30-hp less than a modern economy car must have been made while under the influence of a mind-altering substance. So what if it only made 110-hp. Back then, that was a ton of power for a two-liter engine. Economy cars of that era were lucky to make 75.



Uh, ok...I know I'm ranting. Ok back to the review.

Actually, I had a heck of a good time reading this book, even if I think a few of Peters' choices suck. <u>Automotive Atrocities</u> has a place of honor on my coffee table. Guests pick up the book asking, "What the hell is this?" but then, as they begin to read it they chuckle, then break out in laughter.

Honestly, I enjoyed the book and it was fun, but it not very comprehensive in its research and in many areas, irritating, having owned at least 5 of the cars featured in this book. For example, repeatedly he rates all cars on horse power and quarter miles numbers, even small economy cars and diesel attempts at high fuel economy. It becomes clear that he has no real general first hand experience and most of these cars are given quite an unfair shot here; several times there ARE real problems with the cars, but they are not mentioned. Also he fails to bring up WHY many of these cars come to market in the first place, aside from complaints about emissions. Overall, if you know anything about these specific cars, or the history, you quickly get the feeling that he does NOT, and failed to educate himself fully before producing this book.
A couple of examples-
1- He bashes the lincoln continental diesel- why? horse power and quarter mile. Also he alludes to ford dropping the concept after two years because it was though to be bad and would not sell. Wrong. The real story is that Ford bought a set number of crated diesel motors from BMW, and installed them in a select number of their high dollar cars. After that two year trial, Ford then made a deal with Mazda, and instead used Mazda diesels in their lighter vehicles, (escort, Topaz, tempo, ranger). The positives of the continental diesel (having owned one)- 30 plus mpg while cruising at 80 mph. Acceleration was decent. It was by no means a V8, but exactly what they attempted, a large comfortable air suspension sedan that got great fuel economy. Also, Ford SOLD every one they produced. There are only several thousand in existence.
2- He bashes the Mercedes 300D and Rabbit diesel- again, horsepower, and acceleration. He fails to mention that the rabbit gets 40-50 mpg and the mercedes gets high 20s to low 30s. More importantly there are thousands and thousands of these cars still on the road 30 years later. They are some of the most reliable vehicles on the planet that still get fuel economy better than most new cars, and most have well over 200,000 miles on them. Pretty good for a little econo box like the VW, and a luxury car that will remain in good condition with minimal maintenance for 30 years, and I might add, represents probably half of the worlds taxi population today (the last of that model mercedes was produced in 1985). A legitimate complaint about the mercedes would certainly have been the price (which he mentions) and about the rabbit could have been its absolutely apalling lack of safety, especially released in an environment of heavy chrome laden american cars.
3. He bashes the Escort GT. His complaint here seems generally to be that they are ugly or cheap. My biggest single complaint with the early GTs was that the carburator was made of a substandard material and they required complete replacement in short periods of time. He does not mention this, though it was a relatively big complaint from most owners. Fortunately, its not to hard to work on them. When It went to fuel injection, it was a fun little car to drive. I owned a 91 model that had a 137 HP mazda DOHC engine.

Bottom line, the writer is clearly a car enthusiast, but you wont really learn anything about these cars and the book is really more of a personal rant from an opinionated guy whose knowledge is of a surface nature. I get the feeling he loves cars, but does not work on them, and spends more time telling others about what he knows. Its like talking to a guy at a cocktail party about his personal mods versus speaking to his mechanic who actually does the work. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. On the plus side, the layout is something I enjoyed, and I wholeheatedly agreed with most of the muscle car complaints he made, I just wished for a little more research and maybe a lot more cars that should have certainly been in the book.

Great design and extremely humorous text. This book is a lot of fun--you will enjoy it!

This book is great I loved it, and the guy I bought it for loved it as well. For anyone that has a grease monkey in the family this is a great book because it makes them smile.

As someone completely ignorant of more than the general make & function of cars, I enjoyed this book much more than expected. It's entertaining & great for humorous quotes.
The author habitually comes into the store where I work, & talking to him is as enjoyable as reading the book!

I got this book for the pure joy of entertainment, and really this book is a must for any car nut. The really interesting thing is i owned three of the Automotive Atrocites mentioned in the book, and agree with everything that was said about them ( The Mustang II, Dodge Omni, and Plymouth Reliant). Another car mentioned, my oldest sister owned,( The dreadful Chevy Vega) and needless to say, she would relate as well. What a laugh ad a half. The only thing is, he left out some truly hideous cars out such as the Edsel and the Corvair. However, for those of you who hated the book, get over it. I think it is funny, and will really bring back the memories, or have you relive your nightmares of one of those lemons, whichever comes first.

I really enjoyed this book. Automotive Atrocities is a must have for any car guy or girl. This book has great information and taught me some facts I did not know. The guys at work loved the book as well. This is a great buy.