These Dead Cars Need To Stay Dead

It's been said that life is all about second chances. Well, I'm here to contend that. Sometimes, things are better off one-and-done. There's some stuff in this world, cars included, that don't deserve a second lease on life. That idea is what led me to the question I asked you all last week. Happily, you folks seemed to agree with me.

I wanted to know what dead cars you all thought were better off staying dead. While I was a bit worried you'd all accuse me of hating cars once again, I'm glad to report that some of you had some very thoughtful answers for my question. Y'all brought up cars that I honestly forgot were dead, and, yeah, I agree. They should certainly stay dead. All cars don't need second chances — or in the case of the Acura ZDX, third chances.

How about you scroll on down and check out what dead cars your fellow Jalops think should stay dead. Is your car on the list? If it is, I've got some bad news. You're driving a has-been. I hate to be the one to tell you.

I am going to go with the DeLorean. First, in sticking with the premise outlined, it doesn't deserve to come back since it wasn't actually very good. But more importantly, I also don't want it to come back because, like a movie that shouldn't have a sequel, it should just exist on it's own in car history. The car, backstory, culture, etc. surrounding it should just exist without something else coming along.

Submitted by: Crucial Taunt

Where do I start?

First one that comes to mind is the Chrysler PT Cruiser. I remember being stuck behind one once, and had ample time to "appreciate" it's styling. A badge on the back of if stated proudly that it was a "Limited Edition."

Not "limited" enough, obviously, because they made that one, didn't they?

Submitted by: ThatGuy

The recently deceased BMW X4. Seriously BMW how many SUV coupes does a brand need???

Submitted by PLAN-B 77

My choice is one you mentioned in the article — The Chevy Monte Carlo. That last generation was enough to ruin it forever.

Submitted by: BuddyS

It's probably REALLY tempting for Stellantis to try and fill out Dodge's ranks by bringing back some old, recognizable names by resurrecting past models, but the Nitro ain't it. It was absolutely terrible in every way.

Submitted by: MrMcGeeIn3D

Ford Pinto is the obvious choice. As long as there are people alive who remember all the controversy and death (real or not) around that car in the 1970s, it will remain a name that cannot be resurrected.

Probably a bit too old for what we are talking about, but still...

Submitted by: KingDingDog

Honda Acura should never name another vehicle ZDX. It is cursed and causes sales failure/massive loss.

The GM built one year only EV ZDX is a deal. Unsold new ones with MSRP of around $70K can be had for under $45K in many cases. The dealers stuck with them are desperate to move them out.

The gas ZDX was too expensive for what it was but if you don't need rear passenger room, it is an interesting and rare vehicle. Good examples pop up from time to time. I passed on one in 2016 for only $18K.

Submitted by: Tex

I had a 2002 Stratus R/T coupe back when I was 18. It was a reskinned 3rd Gen Eclipse. It didn't handle the best, it liked to eat through front rotors, and the factory wheels would bend very easily. However, it did have a spacious trunk with fold-down seats, the cabin was roomy, and it was a perfectly serviceable daily driver for a teenager.

With that said, I don't think Dodge should resurrect the cloudcar moniker, but I do think there is an opportunity for an entry-level coupe with useable space.

Submitted by: Huckleberry

GM has tried a couple times to bring back the Camaro and although the car is cool and the like, it just doesn't have the sales needed to survive. Chevy has the Corvette, just focus on it.

HOWEVER... I think there is a market for a "Camaro II"

I think that the market might be ripe for a fun, cute/cool car that is inexpensive to purchase and operate. The original Mustang was a massive sales success as a fun version of a cheap boring car. The Mustang II was also a massive sales success with a similar formula. There might be a place in the market for a fun cheap car.

Only don't do what Ford did. Do NOT call it the Camaro II. Nobody will forgive you for slamming a Trax and putting a coupe body on it and having it compared to the rip-snorting quasi-race car that was the ZL-1. Just like nobody forgave Ford for putting a load of make-up on a Pinto and have it have the same name as the Cobrajet or Mach-1.

Submitted by: hoser68

My pick is none. I don't think any car needs to stay dead, they just need a company willing to invest in a good quality product.

Submitted by: RC350F

Honestly, let the dead be dead.

We need new ideas, not continual fan-driven reboots of the same material over and over again. Our whole culture is stuck in this loop of rehashing and remaking and restarting rather than looking forward to something new.

We don't need a new Camaro. The Camaro was a good idea 60 years ago but that was 60 years ago. We don't need a rebooted Alfa Romeo. We honestly don't need a new IH Scout. Nor do we need a new spiderman reboot, a new "scrubs," a new "malcolm in the middle" or to make america great again. We don't need zombie IP that keeps coming back from the dead over and over because it's easier to raise the dead than to take a chance and create something new.

We need new ideas that fit the times we live in now, not ideas that fit some rose-tinted view of a past that honestly, wasn't that great for a whole lot of people (and honestly, wasn't that great for any of us.) We need to look forward. We need to recognize where we are, not idolize where we were.

Build me a car based on the times we live in now, that's looking forward to the future, not desperately holding on to a misremembered past. 

Submitted by: Buckfiddious