What cars do you consider 'brilliant failures'?

[fbc]

The problem with the 380 was how it looked inside & out - just so dull & plain. If you want large Aussie that's dull & plain you get a Camry - the 380 needed to be different, it needed to spark people's interest. I'd not class it as a 'brilliant' failure, it just wasn't brilliant in any way - it was competent & merely matched the class average when it was launched. It was doomed.

[airmenair]

It had to be done. If you don't know about this car and why it failed, wikipedia it. I don't feel like writing anything up about it at the moment.

Merkur XR4Ti

[edkwon]

Originally Posted by public

Of course, the DeLorean DMC-12. A car for the future that took far more years to produce than it was in actual production (1981-1982)...



It was planned to become a volume seller, but was too fat, too expensive and the anti-smog equipment crippled the performance.

I thought about mentioning the DMC-12, but didn't because aside from the futuristic design and Back to the Future hype, it really was a crap car. Hell thats not even a real stainless steel body, but steel panels glued onto a fiberglass body. and the engine/suspension was pretty poor.

[edkwon]

Originally Posted by airmenair

It had to be done. If you don't know about this car and why it failed, wikipedia it. I don't feel like writing anything up about it at the moment.

Merkur XR4Ti

Does that really count tho, because the Ford Sierra and Cosworth were very successful and revered in the UK and europe, its just the US that didn't 'get it'.

I feel like the Merkur branded car is a pretty insignificant footnote in the car's history.

[Labcoatguy]

Toyota MR2


Infiniti Q45 (first and third generations only)

[Adunaphel]

Originally Posted by edkwon

Does that really count tho, because the Ford Sierra and Cosworth were very successful and revered in the UK and europe, its just the US that didn't 'get it'.

I feel like the Merkur branded car is a pretty insignificant footnote in the car's history.

Still, it was a brilliant car, and it failed in the us.

[edkwon]

Originally Posted by Adunaphel

Still, it was a brilliant car, and it failed in the us.

but the US was not its home market and if you count total global sales, hardly a failure at all.

Thats like saying the Ford Mustang sold millions in the US, but because it only sold a total of say...3 units in India, that makes it a sales failure?

[airmenair]

The merkur name was unique to the US. The only thing it shared with it's european counterparts was the body. The engine and drivetrain among other things were a US only thing. So, the brand Merkur and the model XR4Ti were brilliant failures. I didn't post the Ford Sierra.

[Twerp128]

Porsche 959


Not exactly an out and out failure, but with no presence in America and little homologated racing limelight it never was the car Porsche thought it could be. Technologically speaking it was the Nissan GTR of it's day. Paving the way with a high-power torque shifting AWD system, sequential turbochargers, Kevlar composite body, ABS, automatic ride height adjustment, Magnesium wheels with tire pressure sensors, the list goes on for days. Really it was never a competitor to the F40 though, as much as Porsche wanted it to be the raw F40 owned the 0-60 and top speed times as well as a spot on every 1986 fifth graders wall

[CrazyRussian540]

Originally Posted by Labcoatguy

Toyota MR2


Infiniti Q45 (first and third generations only)
(*picture of Infiniti*)

I see the 3rd gen all the time. What I really don't see is this



Also... Most of you probably won't agree with this, but I think this was a brilliant failure.

[Tim0r]

The Honda Civic. Yeah, yeah i know, the Honda Civic sells a billion units a day worldwide, however: When they first introduced the pictured model in .de Honda tried to promote its new CVT gearbox with it, hailing it as the next big thing in gearboxes. Car magazines tested the car and quickly found out that the CVT gearbox basically keeps the engine running at close to maximum RPM's whenever you hit the throttle, and as a result of that behaviour absolutely nobody bought one.

[Labcoatguy]

Originally Posted by CrazyRussian540

I see the 3rd gen all the time. What I really don't see is this
(1st gen M45)
Also... Most of you probably won't agree with this, but I think this was a brilliant failure.
(Lincoln Blackwood)

Yeah, I still have a massive soft spot for that generation M45, although it had more niche appeal than brilliance. I definitely want one in a few years and open up the exhaust on that V8.

As for the Lincoln Blackwood...yeah, you're going to have trouble finding people to agree with you . It certainly failed brilliantly, but a brilliant failure? Sorry, doesn't quite compute.

[edkwon]

Originally Posted by Twerp128

Porsche 959


Not exactly an out and out failure, but with no presence in America and little homologated racing limelight it never was the car Porsche thought it could be. Technologically speaking it was the Nissan GTR of it's day. Paving the way with a high-power torque shifting AWD system, sequential turbochargers, Kevlar composite body, ABS, automatic ride height adjustment, Magnesium wheels with tire pressure sensors, the list goes on for days.

Again, cars like this don't really count in this thread, because it was an intended limited-production homologation special for the racing version. And there are other examples of exotic, limited edition sports cars that never made it in the US for emissions/crash/etc reasons.

If you want to talk about the 959's failure in the motor racing scene because it never ended up being used for what it was developed/intended for (Gruppe B WRC racing) then yes i agree, but as a commerical/sales failure, doesnt really apply considering it SOLD OUT its production run. That would considered a success to many.

[Twerp128]

Sorry just skimmed the rules, then how 'bout this.

[No Boss]

Originally Posted by CrazyRussian540

Also... Most of you probably won't agree with this, but I think this was a brilliant failure.

+1... I remember that, total 'WTF?!' moment.

[thevictor390]

IIRC the Blackwood had a split tailgate hinged on both ends... because that's better somehow.

[CrazyRussian540]

Originally Posted by No Boss

+1... I remember that, total 'WTF?!' moment.

Originally Posted by thevictor390

IIRC the Blackwood had a split tailgate hinged on both ends... because that's better somehow.

The truckbed was also totally useless.

Originally Posted by Twerp128

Sorry just skimmed the rules, then how 'bout this.

AHAHAH WOW!
I'm watching Pirates of Silicon Valley right now, and I just watched the scene where Bill Gates hits one of those with a bulldozer.

[Censport]

Originally Posted by Twerp128

Sorry just skimmed the rules, then how 'bout this.

That's exactly what I was going to say, the Corvair. It was indeed brilliant - a rear-engine, air-cooled car built in Detroit (and California, and St. Louis, and Canada, etc.). But even though it was offered for a full decade (Oct 2, 1959 to May 14, 1969) and in a range of models, sales weren't exactly great.

1960 Corvair 700 sedan:


1961-1964 Rampside pickup:


1961-1965 Greenbrier van:


1961-1964 Corvan 95 (seen here with the desirable 8-door option):


1961-1962 Lakewood wagon:


1962-1964 Spyder (also available in coupe form):


And there were special offerings from the aftermarket, such as John Fitch's Fitch Sprint:



And if you wanted to go racing, you called up Don Yenko and ordered a Yenko Stinger in one of four tuning stages:



And of course the 1965-1969 500/Mona/Corsa coupes and convertibles:


And yet, after all that, it was considered a "failure". The Rodney Dangerfield of classic cars. And the birth of Ralph Nader's career... whatever he does.