# data.attributes.body.value
See full winners gallery

VOTING IS NOW CLOSED! Check out who the winner is. Or maybe that's the loser.

As you may have read on more reputable websites than this, the great and the good were assembled last night at the self-styled Oscars of the motoring world, the What Car? Awards (to be fair, only they'd use a word like 'motoring').

Anyway, it's an event well respected by the industry - us too - and as usual a lot of good, sensible cars won good, sensible awards. Everyone was happy.

But what of the duffers? What of the inexcusable crapboxes that've been foisted on the unwary, unwelcoming public over the last year? We're very good at lauding the hero car makers, less good at giving the rubbish ones a good kicking. Apart from Clarkson, maybe.

So, in a format not that dissimilar to the Razzies - the anti-Oscars that honours the very worst in film-making - Top Gear has selflessly assembled the flimsiest, laziest, most cynical cars of the last year and glued them all together into a hideous gallery of automotive sub-averageness. We call them the WTF Car? Awards. We may make this an annual thing if we don't get lynched beforehand.

And here's how it works. First, take a click through the gallery of winners (losers?) to get a feel for the crop of total snotters we've picked out, then make your way to our Foreman blog to read a more detailed case for each of them.

It's on the blogs that you'll be able to go wading in with your thoughts on this, but be aware of one thing: in typical scientific, Top Gear style we'll be deciding on the overall winner of the WTF Car? Award 2009 by counting up the comments you guys post.

That means the one with the most posts wins, right? So think carefully before you type - and don't go spamming us with senseless repeat messages, we'll just remove them.

Off you go, then, and be vocal. We might even publish some of WTF Car? 2009 in Top Gear magazine...

# data.attributes.body.processed
See full winners gallery

VOTING IS NOW CLOSED! Check out who the winner is. Or maybe that's the loser.

As you may have read on more reputable websites than this, the great and the good were assembled last night at the self-styled Oscars of the motoring world, the What Car? Awards (to be fair, only they'd use a word like 'motoring').

Anyway, it's an event well respected by the industry - us too - and as usual a lot of good, sensible cars won good, sensible awards. Everyone was happy.

But what of the duffers? What of the inexcusable crapboxes that've been foisted on the unwary, unwelcoming public over the last year? We're very good at lauding the hero car makers, less good at giving the rubbish ones a good kicking. Apart from Clarkson, maybe.

So, in a format not that dissimilar to the Razzies - the anti-Oscars that honours the very worst in film-making - Top Gear has selflessly assembled the flimsiest, laziest, most cynical cars of the last year and glued them all together into a hideous gallery of automotive sub-averageness. We call them the WTF Car? Awards. We may make this an annual thing if we don't get lynched beforehand.

And here's how it works. First, take a click through the gallery of winners (losers?) to get a feel for the crop of total snotters we've picked out, then make your way to our Foreman blog to read a more detailed case for each of them.

It's on the blogs that you'll be able to go wading in with your thoughts on this, but be aware of one thing: in typical scientific, Top Gear style we'll be deciding on the overall winner of the WTF Car? Award 2009 by counting up the comments you guys post.

That means the one with the most posts wins, right? So think carefully before you type - and don't go spamming us with senseless repeat messages, we'll just remove them.

Off you go, then, and be vocal. We might even publish some of WTF Car? 2009 in Top Gear magazine...

# data.attributes.body.summary
In a world full of glitzy awards, some finger-pointing at the car makers that really let us all down