News: Time magazine 50 worst cars?

[killain]

I don't know how many of you read Time Magazine but they recently had an article about the 50 worst cars built ever. A lot of them were understandable but two struck me as odd, one was the 1982 Camaro 'Iron Duke' 4 cylinder, which is kinda understandable. It was way underpowered as it had a 0 to 60 time of a little over 20 seconds. But the other was the 1980 Corvette 305 california model with the LG-4 V8. I don't understand their thinking, the 1980 305 made 180 horses and the 350 V8 only made 10 horses more and the 350 L-82 made 225 HP. I don't understand why they would pick a car that wasn't all THAT bad, all things considered. They called the LG-4 as 'Wholly Inadequate' as compared to the L-48 at 190 HP. I don't understand their thinking? What's your take?

 

[twiget]

I think it might be a case of people not knowing Corvettes very well. I've known a couple people who have owned the 1980 LG4 'Vette, and they too believed their car suffered a huge power defficency, compared to the '80 L-48.

According to the CAC Model Center the '80 'Vette lost 250lbs, when compared to the '79 'Vette, so I have to wonder if loosing 10hp would make much difference when the car was that much lighter. The mid-70's and early 80's were not kind to the Corvette, but I do not think the '80 LG4 'Vette diserves to be on the 50 Worst list.

Jason

 

[topless82vette]

haha if you think a 180hp LG-4 is bad try a 145hp LG-4 with 273 gears LOL. I've owed one and it can be outrun on foot and lacks the ability to spin its tires on glare ice.

 

[s'noJob]

Maybe Time Magazine looked at more than the power.

s'noJob

 

[killain]

Welll I'm no expert, but I know that the 1980 corvette had thinner window and windshield glass, thinner fiberglas in the body and a lot of parts that were steel in the 79, but were alumimun in the 1980. But really, 10 horsepower? there ain't no way your gonna feel the ten horses. My 79 is no speed demon, but is a damn nice boulevard cruiser with 195 HP. I just get upset when people who know little about the Corvette, write articles about them. Misinformation is a poison ! If your passonate about the Corvette you have to be willing to accept criticism were it warranted, but you have to right mis information when it is printed.:bash

 

[6880 Mike]

...I don't understand why they would pick a car that wasn't all THAT bad, all things considered....What's your take?...

A. The author of the article doesn't know much about Corvettes.

B. They're trying to sell magazines.

 

[s'noJob]

Here's the link to the Corvette entry from Time Magazine. To me, the article is not blasting GM as much as it is critical of how all cars suffered during the anti-pollution rage of the 70s, the California version specifically.

From the article:

[T]he "California" Corvette sucked its pitiful rivulet of horsepower through the straw of a torque-sapping three-speed automatic transmission. That gave the Corvette ... acceleration comparable to a very hot Vespa.

Further, consider that the person making these claims is, as Time Magazine states:

Dan Neil, Pulitzer Prize-winning automotive critic and syndicated columnist for the Los Angeles Times

The point is, in Mr Neil's opinion, the California version of the 1980 Corvette represents the absolute low point in the history of the marque. I'd like to invite anyone who actually owns the subject automobile to chime in with their thoughts.


s'noJob

 

[hotshotzny]

I don't know how many of you read Time Magazine but they recently had an article about the 50 worst cars built ever. A lot of them were understandable but two struck me as odd, one was the 1982 Camaro 'Iron Duke' 4 cylinder, which is kinda understandable. It was way underpowered as it had a 0 to 60 time of a little over 20 seconds. But the other was the 1980 Corvette 305 california model with the LG-4 V8. I don't understand their thinking, the 1980 305 made 180 horses and the 350 V8 only made 10 horses more and the 350 L-82 made 225 HP. I don't understand why they would pick a car that wasn't all THAT bad, all things considered. They called the LG-4 as 'Wholly Inadequate' as compared to the L-48 at 190 HP. I don't understand their thinking? What's your take?

what month was that in there... i subscribe and dont remember seeing it.... but half the time it takes me a month to read a mag on my favorite seat in the house

 

[Koop]

I drove that car when it was new in 1981 (a left over 1980, 305 California Vette).

I could comment as I remember the ride clearly, but I just can't bring myself to say those things about a Vette, even that one.

On the bright side, the Chevette Diesel was far worse.

 

[locks]

I drove that car when it was new in 1981 (a left over 1980, 305 California Vette).

I could comment as I remember the ride clearly, but I just can't bring myself to say those things about a Vette, even that one.

Well said. Also I believe the torque must have been a lot less than the L48.

 

[Koop]

Well said. Also I believe the torque must have been a lot less than the L48.

You got no idea!

 

[s'noJob]

Well said. Also I believe the torque must have been a lot less than the L48.

Hmmmm. It's beginning to seem like Mr Neil's opinion is holding up.

s'noJob

 

[Yoda]

I haven't checked the torque specs... lately But I don't think there is/was much difference in the torque at the rearends of the LG4 / L48 / L81 and even the L82, when compared to the rpms required

My ole pal BLACKDOG has a 1980 LG4 and it is pretty torquey and not a bad stop light car. During our cross country treks a few years ago, he turned a whole lot more rpm's running 80 - 90mph with me and had a bit of a heating problem. Never boiled over but at higher rpms it would run above 250 degrees.. of course he had other issues ~ Like a damaged airdam..

I had a NEW 1980 4-speed, which was the L48 and it ran just fine.. My L81 runs with about anything for the first 30 feet or so..

Bud

 

[6 Shooter]

Time Magazine: What do you expect...

...from a bunch of Tree Hugging Liberals! ;squint:​

L8TR - D

 

[catbert]

I don't know about being among the 50 worst cars of all time, but that model sure is among the worst Vettes. But remember, that era produced a big bunch of really crappy cars - my Cordoba comes to mind.

 

[s'noJob]

California Cars - look great, run like carp

My ole pal BLACKDOG has a 1980 LG4 and it is pretty torquey and not a bad stop light car.

Is BLACKDOG from California? Because that is the model the author specifically targets. Trust me, having lived in California for ten years, the cars Detroit sent us felt like there was a potato shoved into our exhaust pipe due to all the extra pollution controls. Performance and gas mileage for "CA Only" cars were much worse than those which were destined to the other 49 states.

s'noJob

 

[Yoda]

Is BLACKDOG from California? Because that is the model the author specifically targets. Trust me, having lived in California for ten years, the cars Detroit sent us felt like there was a potato shoved into our exhaust pipe due to all the extra pollution controls. Performance and gas mileage for "CA Only" cars were much worse than those which were destined to the other 49 states.

s'noJob

BLACKDOG as you can see, Yep the DawG is from Central California. Before the DawG changed motors and transmissions, he made 2 trips with me from CA to Bowling Green, KY. One was the south route (I-40) and the other was across I-80.

Long story how BLACKDOG got his name I'll let him tell the story otfl DawG hasn't updated his signature or his statistics, he now ALSO has a 2008 Crystal Coupe :dance

I've always thought if someone wanted a hotrod, they should build a HotRod if Class is what they're looking for, then drive come Glass

Bud

 

[s'noJob]

Before the DawG changed motors and transmissions...

So he IS from the Golden State. Now I gotta ask. Did he change the engine and tranny because of the lousy performance?

s'noJob

 

[Yoda]

So he IS from the Golden State. Now I gotta ask. Did he change the engine and tranny because of the lousy performance?

s'noJob

You'd have to ask him, but from my long association with the DawG I'd say it was more to do with getting frustrated with the engine temp being so high, and the transmission not having OT. He had BowTie install a 200R, I don't recall exactly which engine he had installed, some Corvette Shop in Sac.

I get around 20mpg @ 70mph ~ 80mph while the DawG used to get around 17mpg or so, that also may have factored into his decision (excuse ).. It was a Sweet ride before the changes, and it is still a Sweet ride, and it looks marvolus..

The DawG is now visiting friends in Missouri until after the first of the year, so I don't know if he has or is even interested in being around a computer . If I see him online I'll direct him to this thread

Bud
(I retired August 2004 and we got the HELL out of Kalifornia!!)

 

[s'noJob]

I get around 20mpg @ 70mph ~ 80mph ...

Twenty MPG, huh? Wanna know how to increase that by fifty percent?

Get a C5!!!


s'noJob