Six cars from the past decade that never should've been made

Yahoo

02-03-2025

For every 50 'Ten Best' cars list written, there should be at least one that captures automotive regrets of the worst kind. In 2025, it's easy to find a good car from virtually every automaker, but there are some major fubars, too. Over the past decade, there have been some cars that have missed the mark so badly that they make us wonder how they ever made it to production.
The reasons are myriad. Whether due to poor performance, weird styling, or a complete misunderstanding of what buyers wanted, these six cars serve as reminders that not every idea should get past the bean counters and hit showroom floors. Let's take a look at the vehicles that should never have been made.The Ford EcoSport looked so awkward that it came across as the kind of crossover your budget forced you to buy instead of one you wanted to buy. When it hit the U.S. market in 2018, it felt like an afterthought—because it kind of was.
Originally designed for international markets, the EcoSport arrived late to the subcompact SUV market. Not only was it dog slow with a wheezing three-cylinder engine, but the EcoSport looked cheaper than it was. The tiny wheels juxtaposed against overly thick fender trim were all wrong, and it looked more like a roller skate on wheels than a small crossover.
The interior was almost as bad as the exterior. Cheap plastics were abundant, and the overly thick dash belied the car's diminutive stature. The weak-sauce 166-horsepower engine was only partially offset by the decent steering. Unfortunately, the ride was bumpy, the handling uninspired, and the 50 cubic feet of cargo space was quite a bit less than its competitors. Ford quietly killed it in 2022, and no one will miss it.
The first- and last-generation Cascada came at the time when Buick's last decent sedan, the Regal, was on the way out. In the mid-2000s, Buick was struggling to build its near-premium image, and the Cascada was its short-lived path to creating more excitement. Unfortunately, the combination of boring styling, mediocre performance, and a cheap interior didn't make the Cascada remotely competitive in the near-luxury convertible space.
The Cascada was powered by a 200-hp 1.6-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine mated to a six-speed automatic that routed power to the front wheels only. Not only did it fail to provide any driving fun, but the ride was stiffer than any Buick had a right to be.
The Cascada's plasticky interior and already dated infotainment system belied its premium intentions, and it failed to get a foothold in the door of car buyers who wanted something more upscale in a droptop. Buick killed off the Cascada in 2019, and we still cringe when we see an unwitting driver without a care in the world behind the wheel of one.Mercedes hoped its Smart Fortwo would make waves in the U.S. automotive market, but it ended up being a misfire of the worst kind. Not only was it a failure to read American car buyers and their love of trucks and SUVs, but the Fortwo was the answer to a question nobody asked. It was a subcompact car novelty that wore off quickly. It was cute and nimble, but its lack of power and relatively high price were the Fortwo's own worst enemies.
It was tiny and easy to park in crowded urban environments (perfect for its European roots), but that was about the only thing it had going for it. It looked more like a death trap, especially when it was surrounded by trucks and SUVs that dwarfed it. To add insult to injury, the car was powered by a 0.9-liter turbocharged three-cylinder engine good for a mere 89 horsepower.
The Fortwo's gas mileage (34 city/38 hwy) wasn't overly impressive for the engine's limp output and shocking for a car this small. As fuel efficiency improved across larger, safer, more attractive, and more comfortable vehicles, the ForTwo's reason for existence quickly faded. Even an all-electric Smart car couldn't save it. Mercedes finally yanked Smart cars from the U.S. market in 2019. Good riddance.
Looking like a tiny, short school bus on wheels, the Fiat 500L tried to capitalize on the charm of the smaller Fiat 500 hatchback but failed spectacularly. The combination of the strange length on what was originally a micro-car made it look like a ridiculous afterthought. This awkwardly proportioned compact MPV (multi-purpose vehicle) lacked the style and personality of its smaller sibling while offering none of the practicality buyers expected from a family-friendly car. It was the kind of car that made you want to wear a bag with eyeholes when you were driving.
The 500L's sluggish acceleration from the 1.4-liter turbocharged four-cylinder matched its dumpy looks. The cheap-feeling and super-plasticky interior, combined with its clumsy handling, turned off buyers and sent them to more practical, more stylish, and more reliable models. The 500L struggled in the U.S. market, and it never earned accolades. The model died a hushed death in 2020, and the world was better off for it.Chrysler is now but a shadow of its former self, but it once had a whopping three models in the mid-2010s, one of which was the poor-performing and horribly named Chrysler 200. The brand's attempt at creating a competitive midsize family sedan resulted in a lame execution, which contributed to its painfully short lifespan.
The sleek but somewhat boring sheet metal wasn't especially breathtaking. The 200 came standard with a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine that makes 184 horsepower, while a 295-horsepower 3.6-liter V6 engine was available. Unfortunately, neither made the 200 especially fun to drive. The 9-speed automatic transmission was sluggish and unrefined, but at least the ride was compliant.
Its success was also hampered by its cramped back row and cheap interior. The dash was overly bulky, and the materials quality was nothing to brag about, with a preponderance of black plastic and disparate shapes. Against the likes of the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, and the Chevy Malibu, the Chrysler 200 felt like an also-ran. Thankfully, Chrysler pulled the plug on the 200 in 2017, acknowledging that the company simply couldn't profit from a car so few people wanted.
The Dart was a weird choice for Dodge. Although it resurrected a name from its own '60s muscle car, the 2010's Dart was anything but muscular and ran counter to pretty much every other model the brand was selling at that time. The hope was that the compact sedan would be perceived as sporty and fun. While it did offer a decent 184-hp 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine, the base was a meager 160-hp 2.0-liter four-cylinder.The downside was its underwhelming fuel economy of between 26 mpg city and 29 mpg highway, as well as its lack of standard safety features and Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, unlike so many of its competitors. The car's ride and handling were passable, but competitors like the Honda Civic and Mazda3 outclassed it in every measurable way, including rear passenger room. Sales sputtered, and by 2016, the Dart was discontinued, ending Dodge's brief and ill-fated attempt to break into the compact car market.
Every car manufacturer has its missteps, but these six vehicles stand out as some of the most misguided efforts of the last decade. Even in an era of modern automotive design and technology, there will always be losers in the game. If it's any indication of how poorly these cars were received, just try to find more than a glimpse of one on your local roads. None of them were hits during their brief lifespans, and they will go down in the hall of automotive shame for decades.
Love reading Autoblog? Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get exclusive articles, insider insights, and the latest updates delivered right to your inbox. Click here to sign up now!