Toyota FJ Cruiser, Eye Bruiser
Here we’ve got an ugly ride by the same great people that brought you everyone’s favorite “Saved by Zero” commercial - which in fact features the oh-so-stunning FJ Cruiser. Truth is that the commercial is as repelling as the looks of the weird-looking eye-bruiser.
Something about a radical look and radical colors is just a bit too much. It’s either or love-it or hate-it deal with this ride, but most people would doubtlessly lean towards the hate-it crowd. To jaggedy and edgy yet bloated and ‘puffed-up’ at the same time. The headlights are puny and weak, giving off just a cheapo vibe. Who makes the turn signal bigger than the headlight? And just look towards the back at the tail lights - they stick out like some pimple that’s filled with puss. And once again we’ve got the ‘white-top’ look which for some reason is very common on ugly cars, as we’ve seen on the Ford Flex for instance. But if you’re really trying to convince yourself that you like this car, then let’s put it into perspective and make it all relative - just think of the fact that it could (surprisingly) look even worse:
The Mercedes G-Class - A Modern German Tank
Oh, the Germans. We just covered another Mercedes two days ago that compromised the German car-marker’s image of “prestige” and “quality”. Now we have another aesthetic failure by Mercedes with the overly-boxy and just way-too-edgy G-class. This seems to be another case of German nostalgia for their military past, like the VW Thing.
The worst thing about the G-class is the geometry. Everything is square-ish and boxy. All the parts are separate. There is no fluidity - no smoothness - no flow. Everything is jagged. The bumper and fenders look like they’re not even fully attached. The hood looks like it’s barely latched onto the car. The headlamps have their own little thing going. Looks like you can just pull out their square housing. And the roof/top? Clearly not even part of the car. You can just pop it off.
Worst of all is that this ugly SUV goes for around 100 grand, which is a crazy amount to pay for something as hideous as this. In fact, you can get a car that looks almost identical for a fraction of the price from India - made by the good people at Tata Motors. Seems to be confirmation that rich people don’t know what to do with their money. It’s even worse when they decide to use their extra cash to litter the roads with some street-legal panzer tank. People, please stop buying this car and let’s just get it out of production! And certainly don’t even think about getting the overly-awkward convertible version which makes this look like the Suzuki X-90:
Tata Nano - The Cheapo Ride For $2500
It’s called the “People’s Car” due to its affordable price. The $2500 price tag also means that it has to be made of components that together cost less than $2500 so that there is at least some type of profit margin on the sales. That also means that you are getting a whole car for the price of a “leather seat upgrade” on a Mercedes. So while you’re driving in this little joke of a car, the guy in the luxury sedan next to you at the red light is farting into a leather seat that costs more than the steering wheel you’re holding, the pedals you’re pressing, the windshield you’re looking through, and the radio you’re listening to - combined.
This car looks like it has a disease that’s bloating and inflating the car from the inside and will make it explode soon. The front hood and windshield are already bulging out beyond standard safety specifications. The thing also came with some type of pre-existing condition that stunted its growth. It looks like a sickly stump, awkwardly underdeveloped. It’s the kid who was tallest in third grade and then stayed the same height for the rest of his life.
It also seems to come in the most vibrant and eye-catching colors possible - such as neon red and sunshine yellow. The car should instead only be made in camouflage patterns to increase the possibility that no one will actually see it as it’s driving down the road. Asphalt grey is also an option. We want to avoid attracting attention to the driver - the poor guy who lets himself see in public in one of these. And check out those wheels. I’m sure that with the low price of that car, new tires will go for about 10 bucks - but if you’re close to a Home Depot or Lowes you can just pop in and pick up a wheelbarrow. In fact, those wheels are made by the same people who supply the wheels for the Tata Nano. Yup, a little known fact - now made public. You’re welcome.
The Mercedes A Class: No Class
What’s worse than a car manufacturer who consistently and repeatedly puts out ugly cars, like Renault for instance, is a maker who usually dominates the aesthetic space by creating beauties but suddenly creates a ridiculously pathetic ride. That’s what we’ve got in front of us with the Mercedes A Class.
Sweet ride, eh? NO! Exactly. What a puny and just awkward car. Looks like you can carry it in your pocket. And what about that flat front? It doesn’t even have the definitions, curves, and lines of an actual car. Clearly this is a failed attempt at some type of “super-compact” car. Sure, there is a demand out there for small cars and they are useful in crowded metropolitan areas. But listen up Mercedes, you have a brand and reputation to uphold. If you can’t produce quality to match the rest of your models, then don’t produce anything at all! Don’t just do it because everyone else is. And with the result that’s in front of us it looks like you just so happened to suddenly decide to create a sub-compact and put the thing together from design to production in 24 hours. No second opinion, no reconsideration, no re-evaluation of the design.
What’s with that up-curve on the back door? What’s with that little pathetic window on the side in the back? This thing is just way misshaped and doesn’t have the right proportions. Any eye that’s not blind could see that right away. A mouse or some other type of rodent comes to mind when looking at this. It’s no surprise a lot of people said that the A Class hurt Mercedes prestige and overall image. Not only is this a design failure but because it’s cheaper it gets into the hands of people who should be driving a Kia and not a Mercedes.
From the back it looks like a van. The big surprise though is that it could actually fit in the trunk of an actual van. And check out the width of those wheels. The advantage is that tire replacements should be cheap if you’ve only got like 3 inches of rubber across. Bad part is that I’d be pretty certain the road-gripping is not that great and the ride can’t be all that smooth either. But what’s completely awesome despite all of this? Clearly it’s the cool visor that finishes off the roof in the back above the window. They were well ahead of the times. The most advanced technology in sun protection and shade creation for your riding comfort. Enjoy.
The Full Plastic Jeep Renegade Concept “Car”
While ridiculing many of the other cars, we’ve joked that they look like “toys” or “Fisher-Price” products. The goal was to make fun of their designs by suggesting how they “could” be viewed as objects for kids to play with. That was all for good times. This time, however, we’re not joking. This is full-out serious: The Jeep Renegade Concept vehicle looks positively and absolutely like a children’s toy. Looking at it, you just want to put your hand on it and push it across the window sill while making a “wrooom” noise.
We should be thanking whatever ‘overseer’ we believe in that this is just a concept car. At the same time, we should be praying to the same fella or lady that his never make it into production. Sure, metallic light-green is a nice color and all. But that’s it - if anything. Even worse, many people have blamed Chrysler (the makers of Jeep and this car - yup, the Chrylser that has gone downhill and is clearly not doing better as we can see) for just blatantly and outright-ly copying this car from the video game Halo. So not only is it ugly, but they didn’t even come up with it themselves! If you’re going to copy something anyway, why not make sure your tracing something S.I.C.K. like the Aston Martin One-77. Leave it up to Chrysler/Jeep though to really mess up. Just look at those puny headlights. Like a little creature just looking straight ahead, staring aimlessly, looking clueless. No conviction in that expression at all.
And check out that overly-rounded buttocks. Once again this is that type of example of a car where you wouldn’t know if you’re looking at the front or the back of it were it not for (of course) the position of the steering wheel and the color of the lights. Rounded like that is way out of style. And what are those compartments in the back? What are they holding? Looks like they’re buckets or something. What is this? A car to drive around and water plants? Is this another one of those attempts at making an enviro-mobile? No wonder! That might explain its ugliness. (Just go with this excuse, Jeepo)
Now let’s not get started on the “safety” aspect of this ride. Does it look like there is a roof option? Nope. You’ve gotta deal with it. Wanna ride it in the rain? Well, hopefully you like water. And water at high velocity at that - right in your face. In fact, forget water and rain. Take it out for a spin in any weather on any day, and with that 3-inch-tall windshield you’ll be sure to get some bugs smashed right into your face. If you’re lucky enough, you’ll get some flying insect right in your nose - and with the speed at which it will be traveling it could very well penetrate your brain membrane, rendering you dead, paralyzed, or incoherent for the rest of your life. Enjoy! Oh, and do you like it when your leg dangles freely in the open air? Well no problem! They’ve got you covered. Just put it through the half-door with the big gaping hole and you’ve got yourself a vacation.
The Suzuki X-90: A Japanese Nightmare
Check out this little hot-shot. It probably thinks that it can attract the ladies, with its tight frame and rounded figure. Problem is that the ladies don’t have much buying power without the men out there (oh, snap) - and no guy would buy this weird looking ride. We’ll give it to Suzuki that they’ve got some nice bikes, and their ATVs aren’t bad either. But what have they ever done for the car market? Nothing, except for put out these unappealing vehicles that make absolutely no sense design-wise. The Suzuki X-90 is no exception. Too bad it doesn’t have another two X’s in the name - then we could censor it legally.
You can clearly tell that this is a Japanese car just by looking at it. The thing has got that “small” trend that all people, gadgets, and food follow over there. It’s just a little nation with little people. The problem with Suzuki seems to be that they haven’t realized that the rest of the world is different. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and Mazda all do well because they understand who they’re selling to overseas. Even Mitsubishi gets it. Suzuki seems to still be catering to Japanese clients. I mean, only a “Hello Kitty” fanatic could love the look of this car - and all Hello Kitty fanatics are too young to even sit behind the wheel of a car.
What is this thing? A simple car by design it’s clearly not. You can’t call it an SUV. It seems like it wants to be a Jeep, but isn’t quite there. A van, definitely not. On top of that, it only seats two people. What the heck! Ugly and inconvenient. Sure, you buy a sports car with 2-seat capacity - but not some unidentified riding object that embarrasses you on the streets.
Instead of just turning it into a hatchback and leaving it there, the Suzuki peeps decided to make the back look like the front. It kinda looks like some space-shuttle when you stare at it for a while. That weird “pod” in the middle seems like it’s “forced” (included out of necessity) just to be able to accommodate the vertical space that a person needs. The whole thing just looks misshapen and disproportional. The spoiler doesn’t make it any better. Clearly it serves no function. It’s not like this is a back-wheel-drive racer that needs a good aerodynamic wing to help it grip the road better at high speeds. The sole purpose of that decorative strap in the back is to make it even more ridiculous and imitate your standard radio-controlled car from Toys R Us. Oh, and the great design on the side of the car in this picture: stellar! And the rims? Super quality. Can I get those aftermarket for my ride?
Oh, and did you think that this car couldn’t be made to look any more pathetic? No sir-eee. You are wrong, ma’am. There are freaks out there who not only buy this life-size toy, but they even go out of their way to make it look even more ridiculous and pathetic. Take for instance, the oversized wheels:
By the way, those are standard size 15″ rims. They just look like that on the X-90 because the car is ridiculously small. Some people even think they’re cooler than that, putting the standard-size wheels everywhere. Maybe that’s roll-over protection? Either way, the only oversized thing seems to be sitting inside the car:
Now that’s one tricked out ride. While we strongly disapprove of the above modifications to the Suzuki X-90, we fully and wholeheartedly endorse submerging your uggler in water. In fact, just drive it into a huge body of water to make sure that it’s getting a real good bath. Yeah, baby! Drown! Drown! Drown!
Renault Trafic Panel Van
Today, Jalopnik.com ‘made a funny’ by featuring cars in which you could live once your house gets repossessed. So we thought why make a new theme for the day - let’s just continue on what’s already been made popular. We’d like to add our own little (or rather, big) fugly ride to the list, which would also potentially serve as lodging if necessary. Yet I wouldn’t wish it upon anyone to drive in this thing, let alone sleep in it. We will go ahead and also call this a FuglyRides.com original production (to some extent) because we have our own pictures of it - just like we were able to originally deliver images of the communist van from last week. Today we look at the horrendously boxy Renault Trafic Panel Van. Yup, it is indeed another Renault, which gives the French a back-to-back double feature. Aptly named, this van undoubtedly stops all traffic within sight as drivers all around lament the contamination of our roads.
Looking at the front, you all should be trained enough by now to notice the immediate mistake numero uno: mixing ugly and plain black plastic with nice ‘n shiny metal chassis. That’s a big no-no. Exposed plastic like that on a car should translate into “don’t do it” in any language, even the French one. Aside from that, it’s got that huge windshield, incredibly steep slant, and weak/rounded headlights. It looks like a helpless little mouse scouring for cheese - with big eyes to suggests its innocence and vulnerability. Who the heck wants a damn cargo van that looks too wussy for a soccer mom to drive? Its face is way to “smiley” and all happy. The out-bulging that the black plastic bumper is sporting is also not a good look. It creates another one of those “underbite” effects.
Now what comes to mind when you see the back? Ew! Ew! Ew! Ew! Ew! Precisely. Once again, here we go with the plastic. Didn’t the Honda Element teach car-makers anything. It wasn’t voted ugliest car all over the place for nothing. Why invite yourself into the same category? The Renault Trafic makes it even worse by pretending that it’s got some grandiose “columns” like an expensive bed headboard. I guess they do want you to sleep in it. Even worse though, this back view exposes the uber-boxy nature of this van. That’s just hideous from all sides. And check out that slight bump above the seating-cabin toward the front. Is that a design thing or does it serve a function during roll-overs? By itself it just looks like the car already has a bump from a roll-over. And just when you thought that all hope is lost…you’re right. They could have at least done something neutral with the rims. But no! They thought, why not include the cheapest possible kind of rims that we can get past quality control. Weak, crappy, thin metal. That’s all we’ll do for ya. After all, what can you expect? It’s not like the best rims out there could make up for the rest of that beast.
The Renault Megane: Another French Failure
So we admit it: the US car industry is not doing so well. But that’s because the whole economy is down, people are spending less, gas recently became very expensive, etc. There are reasons that are out of the manufacturer’s control. Despite all of this, you can’t say that US car-makers have consistently produced hideous-looking cars. Although not all, most cars would pass the “ok, that looks fine” test. But what the heck is it with these European car markers (except for many of the German brands/models, of course). We’ve already seen how the Italians can mess up, how a German car made it on the list, and how the French created something that doesn’t even look like a car. You’d think that those were isolated instances - but no ma’am. Here the French go again with the Renault Megane.
From the front, the car doesn’t look all awesome and amazing, but it could fly. Typical and plain, but it doesn’t necessarily kill your eyes when looking at it. Sure, why extend the headlights toward the center with some ugly black plastic? Why not just let the metal hood wrap fully around the lamps, which are rather nicely contoured and have that “aggressively slanted” look that people tend to like? Who knows. But it must have something to do with the fact that the rest of the car is incredibly ugly, so they probably couldn’t leave too much of a contrast with a front that would otherwise be just fine.
Now will you just look at that ass! Damn! If this were a woman, and you were a back-lovin’ man, then we’d agree that this is one booty-licious ride. We all know that Sir Mix-a-Lot loved big butts and he couldn’t lie, and we can’t deny that when a girl walks in with an itty-bitty waist…
But who knew that the French, with their butter and croissant loving habits, all happy on their wine-and-cheese diets, were so fond of large behinds? Did they decide to target the American hoods with this ride after getting a rough (and clearly butchered) translation of Mix-a-Lot’s famous song? This car look way deformed. That thing in the back is bigger than the hood on some other cars out there. This little Renault is sporting a tumor that’s been overlooked for quite some time - having grown to such proportions that you’re not sure where the front of the car is. If you can’t really tell how unappealing this bump in the back is, here is another perspective:
Who would guess that this is the back of the car, just by looking at that picture? Hardly anyone (although the wiper, window, wheel trim, and bumpers kinda give it away…). It makes the car look blatantly awkward. Like it’s bloated and needs some serious relief - or medical care. What’s the purpose of it anyway? Clearly can’t be aesthetic (although maybe for the French it is). And it can’t serve much of a “space adding” function since you’ve only got some extra clearance horizontally on the bottom of the trunk. We should all be grateful that Renault is not sold in the United States. We would all be worse off.
The Fiat Multipla Will Scar Your Eyes
We will take the great wisdom and advice of a PWoT Moderator in the forums of Cracked.com who goes by the name Ripper, and we will attempt to make this site a bit better and more appealing to your sense of sight by including more pictures and having less text. He pointed out that at times the paragraphs turn into a “wasteland of text” that is distracting from the potential it might have for spurring the occasional chuckle. So for chuckling’s sake, we will start busting out the visual media a bit more. Enjoy.
Here is a car that just causes immense pain when you look at it - your eyes hurt, your spirit dies, and any hope you had about the goodness of human civilization just evaporates. The Fiat Multipla is one sorry attempt at design. And to think that this is the exact same company that also produces Ferrari’s and Maserati’s, some of the best-looking cars on the road. Maybe they purposely put all the crappy designers in the lower-end brand of the family to make the high-end cars stand out more. Wouldn’t be a bad strategy - and it’s clearly working. The front of this car looks like some type of insect with a horrible disease that causes its mouth to swell up and bulge out. Those little itty-bitty headlamps just make the car look outright ridiculous and blatantly pathetic. If it’s indeed true that humans are attracted to cars with angry faces, then everyone must inherently hate the Multipla. Its face looks like a Japanese cartoon character that’s just oh-so joyously happy and simply can’t contain his extreme excitement through that awkward grin.
The back is also no good. The paneling is just too flat and too simple. The lights in the back bulge out and the sides look a bit like love-handles. Sometimes you’ve got a car that has a sexy front but an ugly back or vice versa, but here both ends are just unacceptable. At least the back window is big enough that it’s easy for anyone to just smash it into pieces. Whether you’re a good shot or not, when you swing a bat at that (which you should absolutely do if you see one of these) then you’ve got some good surface area and there is a high chance of you just getting it right in the sweet spot.
Worst of all though is the way that the Multipla looks from the side. It gives me goosebumps to look at this and just consider that it’s actually real and not just from some messed up Sci-Fi movie. What the hell is that awkward extra bulge between the hood and the windshield? Sure, when designing a car you might hope to make it “different” and there is not much to change since a car is a car - but why do you have to just go out there and offend people by putting something misshapen and deformed on the roads? The whole thing is just so incredibly disproportional - with windows too big and that weird curvature. Instead of getting a tax credits such as for hybrids and electrics, anyone who is driving one of these should be paying double taxes for imposing a very strong negative externality upon the rest of the world.
VW Thing - The Name Says it All
This is one hideous, despicably ugly, horrendously unattractive, just blatantly disgusting wanna-be car. How in the world did they produce these? It’s easy to understand how someone designed it though - this thing took absolutely no work to plan out. Draw a straight line for each side, a straight line for the hood, a straight line for the windshield - and you know what, since we’re going with the theme of straight lines, why don’t you also draw several straight lines on each straight panel of plain metal that you can find. Yet despite all of this straightness, the car is as gay as anyone could have ever made it. And what the hell are those handles or bars in the front? Do they expect that people will hold on to those? When? While driving? Pulling the car when it doesn’t start? Are you suggesting it’s unreliable? I was hoping that at least it would be reliable since it seems like there is nothing else redeeming about it. This better be one of those cases where the performance makes up for the looks.
If you think a bit about it though, it might not be too surprising that this car was made as it is - considering that it’s from the Germans. Their whole culture relies on the premise that “everything must be in order.” They’re military people. A nation of systematic planners, strategists, and the enforcers of “order” - yet based on their own (often unfortunate) schedule. This car is just another example of that. What better way to ensure “order” and keep everything perfectly organized than to embody it in a concoction that symbolizes the easiest formation of geometrical order? This attempt at a car probably made the German people proud. Under a German brand, embodying German orderly perfection, and distributed across the world, it was a perfect example of German culture. Does that make it any better? Not at all. That just makes it worse - since it blinded the designers even more and misguided objectives, once again ruining aesthetics. Great job, Deutschland. At least you’re good at soccer though.
So they made a military vehicle that symbolized their people and hoped that the rest of the world would embrace it. Well, apparently there are always people on both sides. Even until today there are many fanboys and clubs and websites for the Volkswagen Thing. Ideally, VW should have been “disqualified” in the game of making cars after creating this crapper. Yet they stayed in the game - but only after creating more “Americanized” designs. That’s a win for the U.S. of A. Take that!
And a last word: Those rims are crazy-ugly. The black bumps look like tumors. Way ugly.
The Extinct Daewoo Matiz
This is the case of one of those ugly babies that only a mother could love. And since a car has no mother, there is thus no one to love the Daewoo Matiz. In fact, its “mother” even disowned it several times. It has lived in more foster homes than the average ghetto thug that is responsible for your local weekend shootings. When you check the Wikipedia page on this ride, you’ll see that it was passed from parent company to parent company. Its misfortune came from day one, when the company that it was designed for, Fiat (in Italy), rejected the design. It then clawed and fought its way into the arms of other makers, but only for a bit at a time. Believe it or not, this car has amazingly made it through so many different caretakers that its design exists as the following models: Chevrolet Matiz, Chevrolet Spark, Chevrolet Joy, Pontiac Matiz G2, Pontiac Matiz, Pontiac G2, Chevrolet Exclusive, FSO Matiz, Chevrolet Taxi 7:24, Chronos UZ, and Daewoo Matiz. Yup, that’s pretty crazy. Agreed. But at least we can learn a valuable life lesson from it - it’s apparently the ugly kid that sleeps around the most.
Why the car is so ugly isn’t very hard to tell. Just looking at the front of it, what’s up with that weirdly disproportional and just “off”/lob-sided slant of the hood? I’m pretty sure that only minivans keep the same diagonal angle from top of windshield to bottom of front bumper. But then they also have that massive size to somehow “make up” for it and at least that’s just the way we’re used to seeing mini-vans. But a small, (very) compact car? It just looks awkward. Then there are those headlights. Clearly the genius designer must have thought to himself that Mercedes has round headlights and Porsche has round headlights - and they’re doing stellar, so it must be that the round headlights are it. They undoubtedly make the whole car. Well, apparently not. For one, you would need to pay attention to the rest of the design, not just the headlights. At the same time, Mercedes has two round “eyes” on each side, and Porsche’s is a bit off-angle so that it’s not flush with the hood. It’s the small details that apparently matter. For this Daewoo hottie the two round headlights just look like they’re trying to imitate a scared facial expression. What could it be scared of, you ask? Well, I think that’s pretty clear as well. Any car within 10 yards of this toy is enough to pose an incredible safety risk, and the little sucker knows it well. So he’s already bracing himself for a head-on collision. In fact, a slightly larger flying insect might put a hefty dent into that chassis. I doubt that it’s solid construction. It targets cheap markets, looks cheap, and definitely can’t have much “thickness” to the exterior sheets, even if they are indeed metal. They should be putting a quarter next to this thing in all pictures for size comparison. It’s so small and stumpy looking that a Prius would eat it for breakfast (if the Prius, or any cars, ate breakfast, that is). The one claim to fame we’ll grant the sizzling Matiz is that it was ahead of its own time by being such a tiny ride even way before the newcomers of the “green” revolution started coming along (which is pretty much just now). And ugly it was, just as hybrids and enviro-amicable cars are today. Take a good look at this one, car manufacturers of today, and consider why Daewoo went bust. Maybe take this as a warning and stop while you’re ahead. Oh shitters - you’re not ahead of anything. Never mind. You’ve got nowhere to go but up from here, so keep on “pioneering” and “inventing” as you do.
The Honda Element: Mostly Plastic and Not Ashamed
That's not just a different color. That's plastic!
Oh, Honda Element. Why art thou so ugly? Cause you sure are one heck of a butt-ugly car. One thing that I can appreciate about the people who made the Element is that they clearly had the guts to reveal that their new ride is mostly made of plastic. Never mind the fact that blatantly showing off the plastic trim around the front, wheels, side, back, etc. is just really unpleasant to look at. Forget that. What’s even better is that from a safety perspective, plastic really seems like it might not do a whole lot. Now of course the main-frame and cage are what’s important, and the rest of the chassis is just for show. Sure, all cars have plastic, especially for the front and rear bumpers. But c’mon - do you have to make it this obvious? Why advertise that the almost 20-thousand bucks you want people to spend will go towards buying unpainted plastic? At least the other folks out there making rides, whether they’re nice or ugly, put some effort into flushing the whole body exterior and matching all components so that it all looks nice and uniform. Not the Honda Element though. No, sir. They’ll make sure you know that the Polyethylene terephthalate from all the plastic water bottles that people so nicely recycle goes right into providing some nicely clashing decorative panels all around your brand-spankin’-new SUV. All you green party environmental freaks out there: this is for you. Go wild!
The newer generation of the Element (it’s still in production?! yeah, that’s what I was thinking!) seems to have caught on and remedied that problem at least. They’re now making it nice and flush on all parts of the car - “finally” following the “trend” that’s been around since the Model T came out. They still kept the roof in the same plastic design. But hey, you can’t have it all, right? That’s why the Element is still with us here on the fugly list. Yet it’s clearly not just that. What else is there? Well, let’s see. There seems to be a trend here. Look at the Ford Flex, the Scion xB, and the Element. What do they have in common? They all have zero curvature, simply made of several slabs of flat components welded/joined together in a simple box shape. The reason for this continued cube-movement must be that costs are lower in production. What else could explain the continued drive against aesthetics except for money. Money is always to blame in situations like these. The Element makes it all even worse though, because it’s so much bigger and wider and taller - which just makes it so much more boxy and cube-y. And then there are those suicide doors which just makes it all that much more tacky. If a sweet ride had these butterfly-type doors, then it would just make it even that much more “cool” - but for the hippies driving the Element, it just makes them look that much more clueless and disconnected with the society around them.
Even if you’ve gotten used to seeing this car on the road and have become fully habituated, not really analyzing its ugliness much anymore, you have to admit, whether you like it or not, that when you first laid eyes on this car you threw up in your mouth a little bit. Yea, it happened to all of us. The only way we can forgive the Honda team that worked on this is to blame it on the inevitable effect of habituation as they were exposed to the car repeatedly at every step of the design. They must have been rendered immune to its unattractiveness. At least they named it the Element through, clearly and undoubtedly referring to “The Elements” as in “inclement and severe weather” - and thus “undesirable” - reflecting their own subconscious disgust for this abomination.
The MDI AirPod: I’d Rather Be Walking With My iPod
Why? That's all. Just tell me why?!?!
What the hell is this? No, seriously! What. The. Hell. Is. This. Are you kidding me? Never mind about all the other ugly cars out there. This makes them look amazing. This thing makes the Prius look like a supercar and the PT “Pity” Cruiser like a “Sexiest Car of the Year” winner.
This was “designed” by MDI, which seems to be French (at least the main site is in French). An open question to these French designers: why would you give the world even more reason to hate the French? Do you hate yourselves? Maybe you’re a group of ex-homeless people who found a pen on the street and stole some napkins from the local croissant shop, and thought that you’d get back at the nation that rendered you without a roof by opening them up for ridicule? If so, then you’re genius!
It’s impossible to understand what got into these people’s heads. I’m certain now that croissants are unhealthy. They clearly mess you up. I don’t know if it’s the vision that got affected or mental state, but whichever it is, I want none of it. Luckily from what it seems this is just a concept car for now, but it’s already waaaay too far into the process just as a concept car. In fact, France might already be busting out some of them onto the streets over there. And it wouldn’t be a surprise if it gets into full-scale production though, since it looks like Tata Motors of India materializes some of the MDI designs - and they already have several hideous-looking kid-mobiles such as the Nano. And if they’ve already got the “Nano” it just seems logical to continue with the Apple name knock-offs to start producing the AirPod - probably soon to be known as just the aPod. If this really makes it out there then I will personally start fund-raising to sponsor a huge multi-national demolition derby where we will have all Nano’s against all aPod’s, and then switch the rules mid-game to make it “every man for himself.” The winner will get a new car, and we’ll blow up the remaining Nano or aPod as the grand finale. I can already see the success of the event. All proceeds will go toward curing the side-effects of croissant consumption.
The AirPod apparently claims to have some super-nifty technology or mechanism by which it can run on compressed air. This makes it a “clean” car that’s “environmentally friendly” and all that crap. What it actually does though is just prove and reaffirm that the new “green revolution” in cars will be a central feeding-ground for FuglyRides.com and for general ridicule worldwide. All of the “green cars” that have been designed so far have been unacceptably and uncomfortably ugly, except for maybe a couple like the Tesla motors models. As for the AirPod, it’s even an exception among that crowd. Simply put, it might be the definition of fugly. I don’t care if it’s “clean” or any of that. I don’t care if it doesn’t pollute and has no gas emissions. I don’t care if it farts out cancer-curing particles as it drives. The options we face here are either to: a) become clean and make the world a better place, populating it even more as health increases; or b) keep the world as it is, with population in check and possibly decreasing as pollution increases. Sure, option (a) would be dandy, but it comes packaged together with fugly things and a full disrespect for aesthetics such as the existence of green cars like the AirPod, whereas option (b) might not be all too great in the long-term but at least it involves a lot of good-looking and “sexy” aspects that make Earth look like a dope place to be from a “yo, that’s cool” perspective for any outside “Alienz” that might be looking on with envy. Option (b) is clearly the way to go. The only redeeming feature about the AirPod is that it seems to have a pretty sweet tint job. That’s not enough though.
Toyota Prius: The LunchBox Hybrid
The Hybrid Beast - No Beauty
Why is it always that fixing one thing breaks another? Here, the Toyota peeps wanted to fix the environmental pollution and gas-guzzling issues, yet they just blatantly and cold-bloodedly killed aesthetics. They must have realized at some point that this was one of the ugliest cars to ever make it into production, but it seems like they must have “calculated” or “forecast via statistical and mathematical modeling” that the motivations that drive demand will more heavily weigh the “green” aspect of the car than the “that looks like shit” aspect of the car.
What’s wrong with it? If you have to ask, you need to see the eye-doctor. Then come to us. We’ll punch you in the face, break your kneecaps, and rip off your nails - threatening to do it again unless you start hating the Toyota Prius (do not attempt this at home - or anywhere for that matter). Just look at that thing. Even neutral colors won’t make it look any better. It’s as bland and cheapo-looking as a Ford Taurus from the early 90s (or any Taurus really). If this were a normal car that sucked in gas like all others, no doubt no one would buy them. What’s that? Oh, shitter! It’s actually no better than a normal car - normal meaning a good-looking refined-oil-powered “environment destroyer” - that’s right. Yet the damn hippies still swear by the Prius. Clearly shows you how easy it is to brainwash people with the right marketing. We should start raising a fund to create anti-ads for all the cars that are fugly yet managed to sell with “sexy advertising”. Sexy my ass.
Without any redeeming qualities about it, and any claim to “environmental sensitivity” thrown into the crapper with recent tests, the only people who could get away with this car by still being able to live a relatively normal life (and not be affected by the faces of scorn and words of ridicule) are those who are already “cool enough” in people’s eyes that their coolness distracts the eyes and mind from the car. This might include actors (and of course actresses), singers, or just general ballers that roll in piles of dough. And the only reason they could possibly want this car is precisely to stand out even more and get super-special attention - in a positive light as being “environmentally friendly”. Bullshiznat. The only person/thing who knows what they are talking about when describing this car is Achmed The Dead Terrorist when he calls it a lunch box. Cheapo lunchbox though. Construction worker type - not 3rd-grader-from-wealthy-aristocratic-family type.
The New Ford Flex: Guaranteed to Trigger Your Gag Re(Flex)
The New Funeral Wagon
You’d think that this car was made 5+ years ago when the industry didn’t know any better and thought that box-cars were “hip” and growing in popularity. But no. This one’s a newbie, barely out on the streets yet. Did Ford miss the memo? You betcha. Did Ford ever miss any other memos? For sure - in fact, all of them.
So now we’ve got to put up with another repeat of the Scion xB trend. In fact, it’s so similar, that even the Flex commercial features flashy graphics, cool colors, and bass-heavy music - all in a sweet little package that might actually catch those “wanna-be-hipsters”, especially among the older generations. We shall all start going to our respective religious organizations on a regular basis to pray that the Flex will not become mainstream. Let the powers that be limit their population to only several so that we can make fun of people who have them - to the point that they will falter under pressure and get rid of them. All will be good again.
The Flex is simply an unattractive car. Maybe they tried to avoid making it a ‘cube’ like the other cars, but creating a rectangle doesn’t make it any better. And what the heck is up with the white roof? You know what cars have white tops? UPS trucks! But they’re big and rather tall, so no one can see the cheapo lack of continuous color. Sure, UPS can go ahead and save a few bucks by not painting the top, while also avoiding too much sun-absorption so that the inside of the cargo area can stay cooler. Whatevs. But why does the Flex need to have a white top? Clearly, it must be the “genius” idea that the “hip” people who buy this car can go all out with dry-erase markers to “decorate” their cars and personalize them. In fact, it would be better if they use Sharpies. Mess those rectangles up permanently. You can’t make them any uglier than they are, so the good thing is that you can only make it better by decorating the top. You’re only limited by your imagination. In fact, we’ll get you started. If you have some spare change around, buy a Flex just for the heck of it. Next time you have a corporate presentation (or school presentation) drive that pooper right through the building and into the main conference room (or classroom). Make sure that as you crash in you flip the car on its side. And bam! You’ve got yourself an immediate whiteboard to present on. Now it’s only up to you: you can have the presentation prepared and just point to the roof-top or write/draw on it in real-time while you present. Wow this makes life so much better.
Yet the true target audience for these gag re(Flex)es must undoubtedly be the profitable funeral homes around the country. After all, Ford serves the police industry well with the Crown Victorias - so why not sign contracts to supply coffin wagons. Take a good look at the Flex. It’s got the length, the perfect width, and sufficient height to fit a full-size body-box in the back. No doubt the Scion xB missed out on the opportunity. Stupid them. Ford was smart here. Cheap, modern, gas-efficient, and ugly enough to evoke sympathy as its driving in a funeral motorcade - the Flex is perfect to carry Grandpa once the day comes. That’s a commercial that we’d actually want to see. Get on it, Ford.
