The Lowest Rated Cars of 2017 by consumers

The Lowest Rated Cars of 2017 by consumers

To help consumers make the great choices. But the same testing and surveys we use to make those determinations also show us, and you, products to avoid.  

Mitsubishi Mirage

An affordable car that delivers a thrifty 37 mpg overall might make the Mirage seem like a screaming deal. But enhancements for 2017 don’t mask the weak, vibrating three-cylinder engine that delivers sluggish acceleration or the clumsy roly-poly handling. Though the cabin is relatively roomy, it feels drab, cheap, and insubstantial. In the end, there is no compelling reason to buy a Mirage and, for the money, there are many much better used cars for the same price.  

Mitsubishi i-MiEV

The i-MiEV is one of the cheapest all-electric cars available, but you'd be better off buying any other EV than this one. It’s an underdeveloped car that is slow, clumsy, and stiff riding, with a plebeian cabin. It takes 6 to 7 hours to charge on a 240-volt, Level 2 charger, or a lengthy 21 hours on a standard 110-volt charger. Its range is EPA-rated at 62 miles, although we generally got around 59 miles. In comparison, the five-seat Nissan Leaf, with its roomier interior, more comfortable ride, and longer driving range, feels like a real car and is a far better choice. 

Fiat 500L

This quasi-wagon responds eagerly in turns, handles securely at its limit, and has a roomy cabin. But it earned a dismal road-test score due to a stiff ride, flat seats, and an odd driving position. Based on our extensive owner satisfaction survey, a high percentage of owners wish they hadn’t bought this hatchback. The 500L also has one of the worst reliability scores among all new cars in our recent survey. If that still isn’t enough to dissuade you, it scored a Poor in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety small-overlap frontal test. 

Chrysler 200

This category is overflowing with competent, and even excellent, alternatives to the 200. It drives like it's from a previous era. Handling is clumsy, the ride is unsettled, and the four-cylinder engine is underwhelming. The transmission is uncooperative and has proven to be a reliability albatross. The tight rear seat feels claustrophobic and access is compromised. In Consumer Reports' ratings, the 200 has the dubious distinction of carrying the lowest Overall Score and lowest road-test score in the class, as well as the lowest predicted reliability rating. 

Toyota Tacoma

The Tacoma is as rough and tumble as it has always been, complete with impressive off-road prowess. But there is no escaping that this is a primitive truck. Despite the recent redesign, the ride remains stiff, handling is ponderous, the cabin is loud, and the driving position is still awkward. The modern connectivity features are a welcome upgrade. Safety features such as blind-spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert are available. Ultimately these electronic niceties do not overcome this truck’s shortcomings. And counter to its past reputation, first-year reliability of the redesigned Tacoma has been disappointing. 

Dodge Journey

On paper, this midsized SUV may sound compelling, but in our tests we found that the Journey has a confining interior and lacks agility, and the V6 delivers the worst fuel economy in its class. Plus, it suffers from below-average reliability and poor performance in IIHS small-overlap frontal crash tests. Even though it rides well and has a relatively quiet cabin, families may be deterred by the snug third-row seat. The Journey is late in its model run, with discounts commonplace. But don’t be tempted. This low-rated model is a poor value anywhere—even at the airport rental lot. 

Mercedes-Benz CLA

The CLA proves that pedigree does not ensure a refined car. At first the engine feels unresponsive, then the power comes on abruptly. Though the car is agile, the ride is punishingly stiff and the CLA is loud inside. Cabin access is difficult, and the well-appointed interior is cramped. The heavily promoted base price is something of a tease; buyers need to spend a lot on options to get the luxury features expected on a premium model.