These Cars Are All Show And No Go

Some cars have looks that their performance just can’t cash. Despite the fact they look like they’d be fast, performance-oriented machines, they’re held back by their anemic engine or less-than-inspiring handling. That idea is what led us to our question from last week.

I wanted to know what car you all thought best exemplified the idea of “all show and no go” — what car is an anti-sleeper. I’m happy to say that you wonderfully weird folks looked back through the many chapters of automotive history to find some truly yucky vehicles. These are cars that will shock you with how slow and unfun to drive they are.

Anyway, how about you head on down below and check out some of the cars your fellow Jalops said were “all show and no go.” Unlike the cars, this list won’t leave you disappointed.

I think you have to include the first Fiero with the Iron Duke. It definitely wrote checks that engine couldn’t cash.

I never miss a chance to deride a Corolla S as well. I shake my head every time I see one. The “sport” version of the least sportiest vehicle made in the 21st century. Thank goodness that rear spoiler is on there to keep the tail down through a sweeping chicane.

Submitted by: GreySpace

I would say the original Hyundai Tiburon. It looked the part but was slow and wrong wheel drive.

Submitted by: Surprise me….

For me it’s the V6 Camaro. They’re always loud looking and sounding but are slower than my station wagon. 

Submitted by: Wrxit

NA Miata. Not in bad way, slow car fast is fun and all, but I maxed mine at 115 downhill with a tailwind. 

Submitted by: Golden Earring

DMC DeLorean: a classic example of a car that looks cool but utterly underwhelms.

If it hadn’t been for Back to the Future, the DeLorean would be long forgotten.

Submitted by: Jason Shepherd

I would say the 99-06 Toyota Celica with the base engine, automatic and the Aggressive Appearance Package, is a good example of a sheep in wolves clothing.

Submitted by: Slow Joe Crow

I cited this for the “car that looks cooler than it is” QOTD article last week, and here it’s even more appropriate. One letter to the editor of a car magazine said the original GT350 wore the blue stripes (wording approximate) as “the icing on a great cake. Now we have the icing, period.”

Then again, most of the “muscle cars” of this era were pretty lame; the Plymouth Volare Road Runner, the AMC Hornet and Concord AMX, IIRC, were barely capable of a 10-second 0-60.

Submitted by: Namesakeone

The Prowler is the epitome of this concept. Crazy hot-rod looks, with a lame automatic and an anemic V6 engine.

Submitted by: Spartaneer

I’m going to use the word ‘disappointing’ to describe my experience. Second half 1980s Corvette, inherited by then-wife from her father. They stop pulling not too far from 4000 RPM. Having been used to various European cars that wanted to go high 6k RPM range or higher, I found the wheezing asthmatic engines of those period cars frustrating.

Submitted by: Rick 

Remember the Diamond Star triplets? Yeah, triplets. The Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser, and Eagle Talon. Boy does that take me back.

Now, hear me out here. Even though the top-dog trims were available with a honking 200hp turbo-engine and AWD, it was the volume-selling lesser trims that really belied the styling.

In base trim, I believe they got a naturally-aspirated four-cylinder that wheezed out maybe 100hp. But the cars still had all the scoops and curves from the top-dog, Fast-N-Furious special. Combine that with comically small 14″ wheels (with hubcaps, not alloys) and tires, and it looked rather pathetic.

To be fair, at the time (late 80’s, early 90’s), the same could be said for a lot of sporty cars. The non-V8 Mustang wheezed off lots with a 90hp four-banger it shared with the Escort. Camaros, Firebirds, and Trans-Ams moved out with the 2.5L Iron Duke 4 (that still does service in the USPS LLV!). Celicas and Supras were also similarly un-motivated by what lay under the hood.

But, those base models subsidized the more expensive models. GM and Ford weren’t going to greenlights vehicle programs with projected sales under 10,000 units.

I would say the Toyota MR Spyder. They could have put their 180hp engine in there and made it a cheaper version of the Lotus Elise, but instead they cheaped out and just had the 138hp engine there and the car never achieved any credibility.

Submitted by: Jesse Lee

Any stock WRX.

IM not saying they are “slow” but people think they are faster than they really are.

A 1/4 time in the 14’s with a 101mph trap speed isnt all that impressive. There are stock pickups that run those times.

Submitted by: SSWHAT2014

An unlikely Candidate, but I will say the Mitsubishi Eclipse cross. I kept an open mind, the car actually looked rather good to me. I said ok it’s not a coupe like the old one, but they were flaunting that it had a turbo, had a bigger flap on the back, a twist to a classic, the Macan exists and that one is sporty and has some go, maybe they just shoved a 4B11T Ralliart engine in it or something. Talk about completely missing the mark, it would have been perfect as an outlander sport, but my lord that’s when I knew Mitsubishi just gave up on life. It just didn’t have any grunt at all, it drove good, but not exciting like they were making it to be (they even had commercials with them on the track)….I miss Mitsubishi Owners day at Cypress though =(

Submitted by: Agon Targeryan

RX-7 FC NA version, with 150HP. It’s not really a powerhouse, but with that high RPM and low weight, it should be fairly brisk, and with those lines and pop-up headlights, it screams “sporty”. In reality, it’s slower than anything else on the road with the same power, including an old Alfa Romeo 155 150HP Twin Spark. It revs really high, and the fuel needle drops at an alarming speed, but it goes nowhere. A 140HP Fiesta Ecoboost will munch it off the line, and the moment you start going uphill, even a 1.4 diesel Polo 6N2 will be faster. I would know, as I’ve owned all of those at the same time.

Submitted by: Tiago Bastos