Failed Names on Great Cars: Lessons from Manufacturing History

Suzuki/Daihatsu Scat

Giving a vehicle a name that doesn’t resonate with the market can often be detrimental to its sales and public perception. A good example is the Suzuki/Daihatsu Scat. Despite being off-road capable and reasonably priced, the name Scat, as catchy as it sounds, failed to attract a wide audience. Interestingly, similar names have historically performed better, such as the Daihatsu Overlander. The latter’s name carries a more adventurous and appealing connotation, which is likely why it may have sold better. This highlights the importance of choosing a name that encapsulates the brand and the car’s features effectively.

Mitsubishi Lettuce

In the 1980s, another Japanese car manufacturer, Mitsubishi, unfortunately made a name mistake that didn’t sit well with customers. Mitsubishi had a history of producing reliable and successful vehicles, but in 1989, they unveiled the Lettuce model, a car named after the blandest vegetable on the planet. The juxtaposition of a high-performance vehicle with a name so unimaginative and unglamorous was a marketing misstep. Despite its quality and numerous successful sports cars in its lineup, the Lettuce model could not overcome the negative association of its name. This incident underscores the need for careful consideration when choosing a name that reflects the vehicle’s quality and the brand’s image.

Chevrolet Nova

The Chevrolet Nova, a well-known and popular car, ran into a naming dilemma in Spanish-speaking countries. Originally, the Nova name meant “new” or “novel,” which was a positive connotation. However, in Spanish, it has another meaning: it means “does not go.” This negative connotation in the Spanish language likely contributed to its poor performance in markets like Mexico. This incident highlights the importance of name translations and cultural sensitivity in global markets.

Ford and the C-Max

Of all the automotive manufacturers, Ford has a particularly poor track record of naming its vehicles. Among the most egregious examples is the C-Max. Pronounced “see-max,” the name is derived from the car being a Class C vehicle pushed to the maximum limits for its class size. However, the name is a misnomer from a phonetic standpoint. As a result, the C-Max’s potential was stifled by a name that didn’t roll off the tongue or convey the car’s qualities effectively. In Europe, where the C-Max is quite popular, it was brought to the United States but faced significant challenges due to its name. The pronunciations “see-max” and “see-maxx” are far from ideal, making it a difficult name to market effectively.

Lessons Learned from Poor Car Names

These examples demonstrate the critical importance of a well-thought-out name for automotive vehicles. Here are a few key lessons: Cultural Sensitivity: Names must be carefully chosen to avoid negative connotations in different languages and cultures. Phonetics: Names should be easy to pronounce and remember, reducing the chances of mispronunciation and confusion. Market Fit: Names should resonate with the target audience and reflect the brand’s image and the vehicle’s features.

By avoiding these pitfalls, manufacturers can ensure that their vehicles not only look great on the road but are also appreciated for their names, contributing to their success on the market.