The Chevy Monza was such a weird design that most automotive enthusiasts don’t even speak of it. The look of a Camaro that was crammed into a much smaller body was bad enough. But then you had the lack of any horsepower to make things worse. The Monza probably could have been a cool car if the company had tried. Overall, the vehicle was lackluster at best, and this caused a rift in GM.
There was also an Oldsmobile version which was worse than the Monza could ever hope of being. The car looked like a squashed Camaro. We’re not sure what GM was trying to go for here, but the car is forgettable at best.
There were quite a few forgettable Chevys that were being pushed during the ’70s. The Vega was one such model that you might remember. What made the Vega so bad? A lack of design was the first and most obvious thing. The car was painfully small, and a cramped interior didn’t help things out. The car was available in a series of different packages such as a wagon and a hatchback mode. Power was derived from a smog-choked engine that really couldn’t pull all of the weight of the car around.
Buyers were greeted to some options such as air conditioning and power steering. Overall, the Vega is a blip in the history of GM. If you are looking at classic Chevy models from the ’70s, avoid this one at all costs.
Perhaps one of the weirdest cars from the ’70s was the Bond Bug Three-Wheeler. This oddball creation was a street-legal vehicle. It was designed to combat the high price of fuel and still be an affordable option. While it was great for urban dwellers or just about anyone who needed a practical around town vehicle the build quality was shoddy at best. The vehicle had lackluster power which is to be expected, and you just felt downright tiny inside of it.
The Bond Bug Three-Wheeler will probably go down in history as one of the weirdest vehicles of the decade. If you are looking for a Bond Bug Three-Wheele, there are very few that are still operable. And in today’s world, it is a bad idea to drive something like this around.
Another strange car from the Austin brand was the Maxi. What exactly did this model bring to the table? Nothing much in the way of design or implementation. The car was a lackluster blend of features and design that most people just avoided all together. The wagon design was practical around this period, but not when the a car was as cramped as the Maxi was. There were very few of these that were sold, and part of that is the design.
The Austin MAXI could have been a great car for the price with a little bit more development. But it seems like the designers just got lazy with the car. You probably can’t find one of these on the open market, but if you do come across one, just avoid it. The Maxi is not a car you want to fool with.
You might mistake this car for a Mini Cooper. But it’s not. Instead, the Hillman Imp was a failed attempt to cash in on the tiny car craze. From a design standpoint, the Hillman Imp was just awful. A cramped interior coupled with absolutely no power meant that you were essentially driving a street-legal golf cart. The car was scary to drive in a good windstorm and the power was lackluster at best. Many owners of these cars described how hard it was to get the car to drive up a hill correctly.
The Hillman Imp, while a good idea, was just a car that really couldn’t stack up to what a driver needs. Sure, this car has a decently cool look to it. But the Hillman Imp is something that’s best left avoided if you want a classic car you can actually drive.
Believe it or not, there was a time when Renault was a serious contender in the automotive world. That time has since passed, and with vehicles like the 16TL, we know why. From a design standpoint, everything could have gone right with this car. But the failed attempt to design a credible family car was evident. Power was lackluster at best, at times it was even lethargic.
Then you had the interestingly ugly design of the thing, especially in the wagon version. In terms of a classic car, the Renault 16TL is probably best left avoided. The car just doesn’t bring anything to the table in terms of design or functionality.
What appeared to be a sporty roadster was a lie in the disguise of a roadster. The 504 Cabriolet was a sad excuse for what a good roadster could be. The first problem here was the extremely lightweight and cheap design. When you drive a convertible you want to feel like the car is going to remain on the road as you take twists and turns. Aside from that little problem, the 504 Cabriolet was extremely lethargic in terms of power. In fact, the thing had lackluster acceleration time at best.
These cars were not too popular because of the problematic engine and the cramped inside. If you are looking for a quintessential ’70s roadster, the 504 Cabriolet is one you should avoid.