Worst cars in history or was British Leyland as bad as they say?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Njaco said:
I dunno.

I owned a 1969 Land Rover 69 for 10 years and loved it.

My father owned a 63 TR 3 and loved.

on the other hand.......

I owned a '74 Fiat Spyder 850 and a '74 Fiat Spyder 124 - the WORST cars I've ever touched!!!!
Click to expand...
69 Landrovers, can't go wrong. Chassis like a small tank and the engines of that era weren't as brittle as the later installations.

63 was well before British motoring was infected by British Leyland, they were as good as anything in the world and the tinkering was easily accepted by the enthusiasts that bought them.

You bought a Fiat? You bought TWO Fiats??
 
Almost bought a Riley once but it caught fire , my friend was in the back seat which sat over top the battery and the springs on the seat shorted the battery
 
The E-type is certainly not an ugly car, she is almost perfect. Anyone who says differently has a problem with their eyes.

As for BL cars we have a 1979 Triumph Spitfire (V I think) which my mum bought in the early 80's. She ran it for the best part of the 80's and then when we moved in spent 10 years in the garage and after a little work we had it going again although it hasn't been on the road in a couple of years but with a little work (starter motor is clogged) it will run again. She is pretty nice to drive as well. As for other BL cars I must I don't have any experience of them and can't say much about them. Top Gear did a good episode on them though which was quite funny.

The closest I have got to something similar was a 1985 Golf II that my flatmates and I had in South Africa, she wasn't the quickest (only did around 100mph) but she was a bit of a tank. Drove a slightly newer one in Cape Town that was better and quite a bit quicker (did around 115mph in her). But still I think no one can deny that BL cars were sh*t and ruined the British car industry but then again the stuff coming out of Italy and of course the USSR wasn't really any better.
 
The Land Rover was British Leyland, I still have the Owner's Manuals. And Colin, yes two, at the same time! Biggest mistake of my.....wait....I have an ex-wife....scratch that.

Those Fiats were horrible but I wanted a convertable. The 850 I couldn't even sit in (don't ask if I test drove it!) and the 124 had more rust than the Titanic. UUgghhh. Pure compulsion buy - never again!!!
 
Njaco said:
The Land Rover was British Leyland
Click to expand...
Yep
but not even British Leyland could f*ck the early Landrovers up
They've got quite a following over here and are sought after by enthusiasts.

The Landrovers that I was used to in Army service had the same mini-tank chassis but the engines could be a tad brittle for something that had a military application
 
Last edited:
My vote goes to the Nissan Sunny.

not a bad car, but not a good car
not an ugly car, but not a good looking car.
this commits the sorst crime of all ... BLANDNESS.

At least every other car mentioned on here has some sort of personality, be it good or bad.
 
Still think the Mayflower was worse you can add the Bond three wheeler to the list as well you even had to kick start them under the hood
 

Attachments

  • Mayflower.jpg
    3 KB · Views: 213
  • bond.jpg
    3.9 KB · Views: 233
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Cars named after (or same as) WW2 and 1950s aircraft?
7 8 9
Replies
175
Views
22K
CATCH 22
O
Assistance with reaching user "Karoband" on 12 O'Clock High forum, Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces section
Replies
3
Views
595
oreisbach
O
What Does These Have In Common?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Lucky13
Well, That Was....Weird!
Replies
10
Views
2K
Gnomey
Kazuhiro Suzuki, Japan's ambassador to Australia, still carries the weight of his father's past life as a kamikaze pilot
Replies
1
Views
1K
Thumpalumpacus
Menu
Log in
Register