One thing I've noticed about the official cars in BeamNG is that they're all good. Even the LeGran isn't necessarily a bad car if you get the right engine. So, where are the lemons? The cars that exploded when rear-ended? The cars that broke down whenever they hit a speed bump? The cars that rusted out whenever they came within fifty feet of a puddle? The cars that were unsafe at any speed? BeamNG needs bad cars, and it doesn't have them right now. Even the lemons are important parts of car history, because without these mistakes, manufacturers would never learn. (For instance, be sure to adequately protect your chassis against rust, and don't outsource manufacturing to Communists.) Are there any plans to fix this? (No, the Pigeon doesn't count - I think of it as more of a motorized tricycle than a car.) Here is what I propose: a Gavril equivalent of the Corvair. Rear-engined, with an air-cooled six-cylinder (optionally, a small-block V8) driving the rear wheels through swing-axle suspension, it is cost-cutting on wheels. It has horrendous weight distribution and lethal handling characteristics - terminal oversteer, snap oversteer, jacking of the swing axles - which were only remedied mid-way through production by the addition of a rear sway bar.
None bad cars exist, all you listed is just results of ignorant people doing something wrong one way or another, than the manufacturer recommended. Beamng, as of right now, only has factory cars with properly, professionally designed customizations. Also, drive a rear engined, swing axle sedan and even tho snap oversteer is a thing to beware of, I'm not dead yet, so what's the big idea? The handling is a nut to crack but only people who crashed the corvairs are the ones that didn't know what they were doing. I totally wouldn't say that all beamng cars have the ideal handling, more like the opposite. There is massive variety and diversity already.
Yes, in case you don't remember, there was a massive economic crisis in 2008, its impact being so far-reaching as to cast doubt on the viability of the free market itself, and with consequences that are still plain to see today. The problems with the FWD X- and A-body cars of the 80's were the result of tightening fuel economy demands and emissions regulations, as well as GM's irresponsible excess in the years leading up to the OPEC fuel crises (remember the massive "Colonnade" cars?), which forced them to tighten their belts in the years following in order to stay afloat. Even so, nothing could have saved them from the 2008 recession.
LeGran is a bad car. The Covet is a bad car, the old Pessima is. I suggested in the vehicle suggestion thread to have a prius or an econobox hybrid for both having a super common bad car, to play with the hybrid drivetrain of the game, and to crush it.
I really want to link any of the books/articles/videos arguing that the Corvair was a fine car. I personally love them. I think a lot of the cars people remember as “bad” are fine. Don’t get me wrong, I really want a swing axle car in the game. What I would really like to see in BeamNG are some automotive oddities, though most of these are probably left as mods (such as the Stryder Propellor mod)
GM didn't lose sales in the 80s because they couldn't meet emissions and fuel economy demands, they lost them because they built abysmal cars that couldn't compete with other brands. The LeGran is supposed to express that and it does it well imo. That means it's a bad car from the ground up.
I'm saying they built abysmal cars in order to meet emissions and fuel economy demands, and due to budget constraints. Besides, was the '85 Buick Century, the LeGran's closest real-world analogue, really that bad when compared to what other companies had to offer? The '86 Taurus, another FWD midsize from Ford, was a piece of junk, as were the K-cars from Mopar. Plus, the LeGran itself is available with a supercharger, and when equipped, its performance is spectacular. So the LeGran is not a bad car, it's just a car.
The Taurus had super-modern styling at the time of its debut and came in the SHO version later on and the K-cars had Lee Iaccoca, so they were punching way above their weight. GM was simply mediocre at this point. The supercharged LeGran is good but without the suspension package and the engine it's pretty horrible to drive.
It's not a bad car. You still see them on the US roads and classifieds, able to be cheaply fixed. Also, communist cars were pretty close to what capitalist cars could offer for that kind of money.
dude...WHAT?? The Taurus was revolutionary, had MILLIONS of buyers, and was the best selling car for many many years, only finally being beaten by the Toyota Camry in the late 90's. The 85 Buick Century was indeed complete crap when it came out... Also, how anyone can see anything other than styling cues from the Cutlass Ciera is beyond me...The Le Gran is almost an identical car, interior, exterior, drive train, suspension...its basically identical. Yes, the Century was pretty much a carbon copy with a few different light and trim variations, but obvious the Ciera is the closest in terms of styling. When the Le Gran was still in development, everyone was "speculating" and fighting over what car it looked like. It looks exactly like a Ciera. Even the red "B" badge is very similar to the Olds' logo from that era. K Cars were not super great, but still were better performers than the GM cars of that era, and also brought Chrysler Corp back from the brink of extinction, along with the Minivans when they came out (which were based on the K Car platform as well) with millions of units sold. Not saying the GM cars didnt sell well, they did, but out of the 3, they were the ugliest, softest, and all around more outdated than the other 2 company's offerings.
Probably because no one wanted to drive them new, so now all the 18 year old kids got em and they last about 1 year or less before they end up in the crusher. Back in 2008, I bought a 1995 buick century 3.1 (even for a 1995 that car was so dated and old looking) and it only had 30K miles on it. old lady owned blah blah blah. 1st day I brought it home, went to go back out and the starter went. OK, its an old car, Ill fix it. 2 weeks later, passenger side axle blew. OK i get it, its old. In the next month, the fuel pump went, the upper rad hose blew, and the alternator died. OK, I know, its an old car and probably wasnt driven much and these things age out. Replaced it all including water pump and timing belt. 2 months later, the torque converter blew up doing 50 on the highway. OK, this thing is a piece of shit. Got that fixed for an astounding 850 dollars. OK it should be good now. NOPE Transmission lock-out solenoid went bad and car went from 4th to 2nd at 65mph on the highway. Got that fixed. Then, maybe a few weeks later, the other side axle shredded. Got that replaced. (i am now into the car for 2000 purchase price plus over 4000 in repairs in less than, i guess, 5 months?) Few weeks goes by, alternator dies AGAIN and in the same week the passenger side brake caliper seized. The transmission wound up blowing completely around 45k miles. Tell me again how these pieces of shit are good cars lol
The ones with the 3.1 were weak. The 3.8s were much more reliable because they used much stronger parts for almost the entire car. I have a 1999 Regal with a non supercharged 3.8, which sat for 3 years. Threw a new battery in it and started right up. I haven't had any issues with it except for the fuel pump getting clogged by the old ethanol gumming up, the tires dry rotting, and air in the brake lines. After those issues were fixed, it drove like it was brand new, and I still drive it with no issues.
I believe the Wendover is supposed to be an extremely crappy 80s car, miles worse than the LeGran. I don't know if it's gonna be as "bad" as you want but it is probably going to be the worst quality car when it comes out.
