These Are The Biggest Fumbles Of Automotive Legacies

Last week we asked you what the biggest fumble of an automotive legacy was, and you all had a lot to vent about. Memories are made in cars, kids are brought home from the hospital in cars. Cars can save your life in a crash, and they can be the thing that you’ve yearned for since you first saw it in a movie or on a poster. Unfortunately, cars have to make money for the companies that produce them, and the pursuit of profit rarely leaves room for emotional connections, so once-loved models change and get discontinued, and once-celebrated brands can end up changing their philosophy or even ending operations entirely. It sucks, but that’s the way things go when maximizing profits and increasing shareholder value are the primary motive for businesses.

I said the biggest fumble of an automotive legacy is Mitsubishi’s handling of the Eclipse, but some commenters raised the great point that Mitsubishis fumbles go beyond the Eclipse. It also killed off some of its coolest and most desirable models like the Lancer Evolution, the 3000 GT, and the Montero, which is a great point. We miss Mitsubishi’s exciting enthusiast vehicles! Beyond those significant fumbles, these are some of your answers to the biggest fumbles of automotive legacies. As always, there were way more great answers that I can’t include here, so feel free to read through some of the comments that didn’t make it into this roundup. 

The entire Nissan brand. How does a company get everything so wrong for so long and still be around? They once had competitive sedans with the Sentra and Altima, a beloved Xterra, a history of fun sports and sport cars with the 300zx, 350zx, and SE-R trim sedans to simply chasing volume. Their products are built with ancient platforms, they look and feel cheap, their product strategy is all over the place, and the brand value is so low that other companies see no value in merging or acquiring them. To go from where they were in the 90’s to where they are today is really sad.

Submitted by: Andrew William

Nissans from the ’80s and ’90s were cool, innovative, and desirable. Three words that don’t really apply to its current lineup, sadly.

Definitely not the worst, but it’s a relatively new announcement and I’m still sore about it…but Volvo discontinuing all wagons and sedans (save for the V60 CC, for now) and shifting to an SUV-laden lineup is super depressing. When you think of Volvo, does your mind conjure images of SUVs?

I get it, one has to follow the market, but abandoning decades of heritage and brand identity just because everyone else is doing it erases a lot of goodwill and loyalty.

Submitted by: Funky Dynamite

I agree that Volvo seems to be experiencing an identity crisis at the moment, and that it might benefit from reigniting a dose of nostalgia from its iconic brick-shaped wagons and sedans of the ’80s and ’90s, but I also understand that modern buyers only seem to want crossovers. If Volvo could strike a balance with a crossover that is reminiscent of its legendary past models, though, that would be really cool.

Going from the old Ranger to the new Ranger. The Maverick is more what I have in my mind when thinking of an update to old Rangers. The old rangers were small, quirky, cheap (well, was until the later 2000’s). The new Ranger is too tall, too wide, too expensive. It should have been named the F-075 or something for how much BTE (big truck energy) they are trying to give it. Let the Maverick be the ranger and let some cool small electric car be the Maverick

Submitted by: Christopher Ralph

I like the way you think, Christopher. 

Mustang II, with the 4 or 6 cylinder engine, and no V8 in 1974.

Anemic.

Then the Mach E was nearly a flop at first, with the battery heat soak issues, only allowing about 5 seconds WOT. Slowest ever tested to get to 150kph ish on the autobahn by some car magazine, got passed by minivans.

Submitted by: DieselOx

I was hoping someone would bring up the Mustang II, and several folks did! I think the Mustang Mach-E is different since it’s still a sporty and fast model, but I don’t think simply calling it the Mach-E would have hurt its sales at all while preserving the sanctity of the Mustang’s legend.

GMs handling of Saab and allowing it to die. Epsilon platform, badge engineering. I know the situation with the sale to other entities was likely more complicated than we all saw on the surface, but I can’t help but feel like GM fumbled it horribly when companies were ready and willing to purchase it. I know the company still technically exists, but not in a meaningful way to fans of the brand.

Submitted by: Frosteeman

General Motors might just take the crown for singlehandedly fumbling the most legacies. Saab deserved so much better!

As a Subaru fan I’m going to nominate the WRX, starting in 2015 when they killed the hatchback, and then with the current generation. The WRX used to be a proper hot hatch – inexpensive, fast, rough around the edges, but unique and very fun to drive. The bug eye WRX and blob eye STI were legendary vehicles. You can’t even hear the turbo on the current one, its price can get dangerously close to $50k, it’s slower than the 2010 model, half of them on dealer lots have a CVT, and its styling has gone from quirky to just plain ugly. I’m looking forward to the day when Subaru really recommits to its enthusiast following.

Submitted by: JonRob 951

Accounting for inflation, the current WRX is actually costs about the same as the bugeye WRX, but I agree that the performance is not as exciting as it used to be. And killing the STI is pretty unforgiveable. 

Just the whole trajectory of Mercedes in the 90’s, going from timeless bank vaults to blobby, biodegradable status symbols.

Submitted by: Maymar

Period.

Can we say Acura in the 00s?

Acura TL was selling gangbusters and was a very handsome design for the 2nd and 3rd generation. I remember the late 90s-00s when that thing walked on water, and then the 4th gen came out and it killed the nameplate. The 3rd Gen TL is still a great looking car, and I love to see a 2nd gen Type-S.

The Acura TSX, a tight, Euro-style sedan with a screamer of a 4-cylinder, and they bloat it up for the 2nd gen, then add a wagon that is only their weakest motor and only an automatic.

They have a fun and playful little RSX, kill it for crossovers.

The CL was never going to be a volume leader, but it was slick, so it had to go.

The MDX was the only thing they got right, and it’s probably the reason they’re still a brand at this point.

Submitted by: potbellyjoe

2000s Acuras are still so good and good looking. Even the first-generation RDX had a rowdy demeanor with its turbocharged engine, but I think the SUV-ification of everything really hit Acura hard. It doesn’t help that there was a period where Acura produced a lot of very meh cars, though.

The Pathfinder. Nissan turned it from a very capable mountain goat of a truck – to one sliding door away from minivan status. Here’s a pic of the last one that was still worth its name and looked great.

Submitted by: PLAN-B 77

Pathfinder and Xterra! 

I’ll say Saturn, even though it wasn’t much of a legacy. But in the beginning, though they had some flaws, they were genuine alternatives to imports, had a great dealership experience, were genuinely beloved by their owners (go lookup Saturn homecoming). Pretty quickly GM turned them into parts bin crap and the brand was gone.

Submitted by: JBodyBuilder

Thank you for saying Saturn! Old Saturns were always so different, innovative, and enticing, but by the company’s end they just became so bland. This might be controversial, but I think GM could have Saturn return (astrology joke) as an EV-only brand and revive its cool factor.

One recent fumble would have to be by GM (this list could be comprised entirely of GM products) and Chevy when they so unceremoniously let the Camaro die with so little fanfare. While it rarely sold in the volumes that the Mustang and later versions of the Challenger did, the last two generations were loved by the journalists and driving enthusiasts, not just for the burnout capability but for their handling prowess. To the point that several legacy magazines compared the final generation’s SS to BMW M3s. And won. And don’t forget the track monsters that the last Z/28 and ZL1s were.

Submutted by: LarriveeC05

Chevrolet has fumbled the Camaro twice now, and I cannot imagine why. Maybe now that emission regulations and environmental protections are fading away Chevrolet will be more inclined to engineer a proper new Camaro? 

Reaching way back…in 1954 Packard and Studebaker merged, with Studebaker somehow anointed the senior partner in the deal. By 1956 Packard’s Detroit operations were shuttered and Studebaker decided to stick a couple of chrome pieces of “Packard” script on a few gussied up Studebakers. Nobody was fooled and after 1958 the Packard name was truly dead.

Submitted by: Spinner145

The demise of the vast array of American automakers in the middle of the 20th century boggles my mind. There were so many brands that seem so distinctive to me, but they all just folded, Packard and Studebaker included. 

How is the Chevy Blazer not here? It could have been competition for the new Bronco and/or Wranglers, instead it is yet another forgettable mid-size SUV

Submitted by: cwheels

I had the Blazer in mind when I brought up this question, so thank you for submitting it. I absolutely agree, and fear that if a K5 Blazer saw what its modern siblings have become, it would be mortified.

Chevrolet Impala, in the 21st Century . . . GM was able to print money with it, for many years, only to see it fade away into fleet sales, before they finally pulled the plug.

Submitted by: JimmyZZZzzzz

Sadly, the Impala has always been a joke in my lifetime. I do admire the early Impalas and the impact they’ve had on car culture, but I can’t really envision a time when the Impala wasn’t just a fleet car. 

There are some very good suggestions in here already. Nameplates that suffered at the hands of marketing or other bad ideas.

But I’m gonna nominate Tesla. They exploded onto the car scene, the first fully new brand in who knows how long. They built huge factories and were just hot once they made the S.

Then, what? ‘We’re not a car company any more.’ What the hell? That’s one of the weirdest wastes of a brand ever.

Submitted by: Poorsche

I used to work at a Tesla store when I was in college, and I was proud to remind people that the company’s slogan was “accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy.” Beyond the original Tesla Roadster and Model S, Teslas are not particularly appealing to traditional auto enthusiasts, but they are great EVs with a great charging network. Thanks to the moronic actions and choices of the company’s CEO, Tesla has just become cringe.