Some cars are the epitome of class, style and sophistication. These ten commenter-chosen cars are the opposite.
This is Answers of the Day — a feature where we take the best ten responses from the previous day's Question of the Day and shine it up to show off. It's by you and for you, the Jalopnik readers. Enjoy!
Want to see this gallery in one slow-to-load page? Click here.
10.) Any Faux-rarri
Suggested By: McMike
Why It's not Classy: Why would anyone take a perfectly good MR2 or Fiero and put an oddly-proportioned, ill-fitting Ferrari body on it? Who are they trying to fool? Do they think no one will notice that the car they're driving has (usually) half the cylinders of the real thing? So many questions, and so few reasonable answers.
9.) 1982-1992 Camaro
Suggested By: digginit
Why It's Not Classy: Commonly referred to as a "Trailer Park Ferrari" the third gen Camaro is easily identifiable by its mullet-sporting pilot and underpowered Iron Duke engine purring away under the hood. Even the Berlinetta models, with their larger engines and gold trim did little to enhance the status of the car. Yee-haw, indeed.
Suggested By: VeloGuy75
Why It's Not Classy: Built on a Studebaker chassis, powered by a Chevy mill and designed to resemble a 1928 Mercedes SS, the Excalibur is so outrageously tasteless it makes my eyes hurt. Who drives these things? Who saw one and decided to buy it new?
7.) Mansory Panamera
Suggested By: vavon205
Why It's Not Classy: A stock Panamera, though ugly as sin, is ostensibly classy. And a Panamera with more power, though ugly as sin, is ostensibly a fun idea. But not like this. Please, Mansory, not like this. You've taken what little class the Panamera had and thrown it out the window.
6.) Mitsuoka Le Seyde
Suggested By: cubsftw
Why It's Not Classy: Mitsuoka Motors has a long and storied history of making really horrible cars. The Le Seyde is no different. The Japanese knockoff version of America's Excalibur was built on a Nissan chassis, and all 500 examples built were sold in 4 days. I can't for the life of me figure out why.
5.) Cadillac Cimarron
Suggested By: JoeDapper
Why It's Not Classy: It was the Cadillac with a Cavalier attitude, and it wasn't fooling anyone. Sales were extremely disappointing, because even the least classy folk saw through what was a horrible car. There's nothing sophisticated about adding a Cadillac badge and a couple thousand dollars to the MSRP just for the heck of it, GM.
4.) Stutz Bearcat II
Suggested By: pauljones
Why It's Not Classy: Taking the name of Stutz's much earlier car, the Bearcat II was certainly a car with presence — just so long as it wasn't your presence. The illusion of luxury and promise of performance were shattered once the car was fired up. Based on a late 60's Pontiac chassis, it's unfortunate that some Pontiacs lost their lives to bring more Bearcat II's into the world.
Photo credit: Bearcat Info
3.) Bentley Continental GT Convertible
Suggested By: luisthebeast
Why It's Not Classy: Congratulations, you've landed a Rap Record Deal/NBA Draft Pick/Hedge Fund. Please pick up your new Bentley at the door on your way out. The Continental GT was once a thing of beauty and sophistication, but has now been reduced to basically entry-level luxury motoring for the least creative and most obnoxious wealthy people on the planet.
2.) Anything With A Landau Top
Suggested By: tonyola
Why It's Not Classy: Hooold on a second there, cowboy. Your Toyota Camry was never offered with a convertible roof. Something here is amiss. You're not fooling anyone, we all know what's under that fabric roof: a metal one. A metal one that doesn't fold.
Photo credit: MetaCars
1.) Chrysler Le Baron
Suggested By: senorducklives
Why It's Not Classy: Re-created in 1977 as Chrysler's "luxury" division, the LeBaron was mostly just horrible. The "sporty and classy" convertible for those who have given up on trying to be either "sporty" or "classy," the LeBaron is more of a punch line than an actual car.
Photo credit: Chrysler-Club.net