Our worst cars of 2010

You often hear people say that, these days, ‘there’s no such thing as a bad car’. Technology has moved on, safety standards have stepped up, and manufacturers are entering into new markets to keep up with consumer demand. However, there are many cars that just don’t live up to the initial hype.

In some cases it’s a failure to meet the promises from the manufacturer; in others a car just doesn’t live up to our expectations. Here are our candidates for the worst cars of 2010.

Rich Headland: Chevrolet Spark

In my opinion, the worst car of 2010 made its debut last January – the Chevrolet Spark. It may be a cheap and fairly practical supermini, but the 1.0-litre petrol we tested felt ‘asthmatic’ as it wheezed to 62mph in 15.5seconds.

Bizarrely, Chevrolet choose to promote this prosaic A-B transport with a marketing campaign pitched squarely at music-loving teenagers – probably the people least likely to want to buy it. Full marks for creativity guys, but I’m not buying it (the car nor the hype).

George Marshall-Thornhill: Saab 9-5

There are few car enthusiasts that don’t have a soft spot for Saab, but the recent period of GM ownership has let the brand rot with a pair of uninspiring, dated models fit for the knacker’s yard. Finally, that changed with Spyker’s purchase of the Swedish brand, and the Saab 9-5 is the first fruits of this new regime.

So I was looking forward to my 400-mile round trip in the new 9-5. Initial impressions were positive – it’s a good looking luxury saloon and still unmistakeably a Saab. But my enthusiasm soon drained as I began to realise this car was not significantly better than an Insignia – costing two thirds of the price.

The 2.0-litre diesel engine is stymied by a manual gearbox with ratios long enough to canter to the moon at idle, and there’s far too much noise and vibration for a £30,000 luxury car. It’s also missing those quality materials that make Audis and BMWs so satisfying to sit in. Yes, it’s comfortable and good on the motorway – but so is an Insignia. Ultimately it felt like an airport taxi, which is where the majority of 9-5s will probably end up.

Claire Evans: Honda CR-Z

Tough question, which goes to show that most new cars are competent and easy to live with. Low points of 2010 included the Proton Gen-2 for being shoddily built and decades behind the competition in terms of design and refinement. Most uncomfortable and aggravating on my commute were the uncompromising Subaru WRX and bone-shaking Abarth version of the Fiat 500.

But the wooden spoon has to go to the Honda CR-Z Hybrid Coupé. It claims to be both sporting and ‘green’, yet fails on both counts. The 0-62mph dash takes 9.9 seconds – slower than a Ford Mondeo – and emissions are 117g/km. To sum it up, it’s not great fun to drive, as abysmal visibility, especially to the rear, with distinctly unimpressive running costs. In trying to combine two different sectors, Honda appears to have failed to deliver on either of them.

Rob Hull: Landwind CV9

After seeing the footage from the recent EuroNCAP tests, the Landwind CV9 takes the mantle of worst car of 2010 for me. Any car that makes production and scores a two-star EuroNCAP rating sets alarm bells ringing. Each section of test footage makes me wince, and the side-impact test is nothing short of frightening.

The most alarming thing for me is the fact that the CV9 is an MPV – a family car you’d use to transport your nearest and dearest. Thankfully, it won’t be one that’ll be coming to the UK anytime soon.

Will McManus: Toyota Auris

My worst car of 2010 really wasn’t bad at all. There is very little you could say against the Toyota Auris, really. It’s OK to drive, fairly practical, should prove pretty reliable and is comfortable. But my lord, it is boring.

The interior is the model of plainness, with swathes of dark grey trim to numb the senses. It seems that Toyota’s designers decided to create a car that could never possibly offend anyone (something VW is also increasingly guilty of), and came up with something that no one could ever love. That said, they did launch a hybrid version, which is worth a few points. If anything, the fact that the Auris is my least-favourite car of 2010 just shows that it has actually been a rather good year.

Tim Pitt: Honda CR-Z

The Honda CR-Z isn’t the worst car of 2010 (step forward, Nissan Micra), but it was the most disappointing. As the spiritual successor to the CRX coupé – a car I lusted over in my youth – the wedgy, hybrid-powered CR-Z showed great promise. But if the notion of a hybrid sports car seems like a contradiction in terms, the underpowered and underwhelming CR-Z seemed to prove it.

With a meagre 122bhp, it’s simply not quick enough to be exciting (even in sport mode) and fuel economy is no better than many sporty diesel hatchbacks. Throw in a dim-witted stop-start system, pointless back seats and woeful rear visibility, and the CR-Z feels like a missed opportunity. Here’s hoping the forthcoming petrol-only Type-R version will change my mind.

Dave Evans: Aston Martin Rapide

This one is short and sweet. The Aston Martin Rapide takes the company into new territory. In my view it is territory the company should have avoided at all costs. Sure, it probably isn’t a truly ‘bad’ car and I can’t say I’ve had a chance to drive one, so it wouldn’t be fair to run it down for its performance – or the maker’s claims.

But gaining the accolade ‘the most elegant four-door sports car in the world’ is a bit like being named ‘the best Wellington boots for running in the Olympics’.

Stop messing about Aston, and start making cars that film-makers will want to feature in James Bond movies again. It’s time to push BMW right off that pedestal once again.

Does your worst car of the year feature here or have you got a different contender for the crown?