Car and Driver Ten Best

[iyalla]

You guys cannot forget that there is always money behind it, and selecting a Jetta GLI and Pontiac G6 for 10 best cars, without even mentioning the LGT, IMHO is just a paid article... No questions asked..

 

Sorry C&D, but the mag quality is really going downhill...

 

Flavio Zanetti

Boston, MA

 

 

Its just a little suspicious that some of the cars that are doing poorly in sales are put in the top ten. G6, GLI, A3 are all struggling to sell.

 

Another thing is it just me or do car manufacturers don't take the internet into consideration. I mean we know whats going on in Europe or in the Far East in terms of cars and the accessories they get. It one of the reason consumers get upset, like us and the JDM spec stuff. You really have to be totally uninformed to buy an A3.

[Aczwild]

c&d just sucks

 

the legacy is on top gears top ten

Its been there for years and they always knock Subaru in a good way, "Those damn Subarus never die!" Jeremy and James love them and I'm sure Hampster does too.

[Bretm1]

I still don't understand whatever logic C/D uses for not considering the Legacy. Plus I'm trying to get to 100 posts.

[Aczwild]

I guess the 2006 model wasnt out in time for the test, but seriously they really just ignore Subarus, seriously, they do these tests and they never go through the snow or anything and then if you look around in 5 years, look how many Subies have broken down vs. all others and what the cars look like too. My subscribtion with them just ran out and I did like how they did the articles with wit and humor, but I wont be renewing because of how one sided they are and dont give credit where credit is due.

[Aczwild]

Oh yea, just go pick up the January 2006 Automobile mag

[legandrex]

Not only was the Legacy snubbed from that test, but so was a Volvo S40 2.5T. My subscription ran out on C&D and I don't really miss it.

[BoxerGT2.5]

and I'm sure Hampster does too.

 

 

I'd like to know how he got the name Hampster? One trip to the ER and a proctology consult later, ya think?

[simisuby]

The Jetta V is one of the homeliest cars available today.

 

The Audi A3 is an overpriced FWD Golf with little grip.

 

I looked at the TSX, just in case I didn't buy a LGT to replace my WRX. Needless to say- I bought the LGT. No comparison.

[Aczwild]

I'd like to know how he got the name Hampster? One trip to the ER and a proctology consult later, ya think?

His last name is Hammond that and in the Seventh season (going on right now) episode 3 he ate half a picture of an M6 like a Hampster would.

 

However thats pretty good

[BoxerGT2.5]

His last name is Hammond that and in the Seventh season (going on right now) episode 3 he ate half a picture of an M6 like a Hampster would.

 

However thats pretty good

 

 

I like my version better.

[FARIS]

did anyone read the comparison in the '10best' issue of the sts-v, m5, and clk-55 amg?

talk about biased c&d give the m5 the win hands down and it seems their reason is that it is due to the great track performance it gives. I am sure that on the track the car is great and the v-10 is bitchin, but they also say that it is too stiff for the regular road, the 7speed amg tranny shifts too harsh under harsh driving, and the i-drive still sucks.

to me it sounds like the comparison was between two fast road cars and one race car.

I think the real reason the bmw won was because it was a v-10 bmw.

[kilowatt]

Edmunds was very high on the LGT in '05 (maybe top rated midsize by staff review) which made an impression on me and got me looking at it.

 

The car is truly not in the mainstream, which probably impacts the odds of it being picked up by magazines. Many people have no clue about anything other than an Outback wagon, if that.

[legandrex]

I was considering writing a letter to C&D about the snub of the Legacy, but it not being in the comparo may be a blessing in disguise. They didn't think much of it when they compared it to TSX, S40, and A4 in 2005. I am sure they would have hammered on it again. They are biased towards Honda products and aparently new VW ones too.

[rporter]

I don't necessarily feel that C&D is biased. I fall more in line with kilowatt's comment about Subaru's not being in the mainstream.

 

Actually, comments by mags like C&D are useful to me, as I feel that they reflect the general enthusiast population. These guys test hundreds of cars a year, and sure, they will pick up biases, but driving cars one after the other give you a definite impression of the differences. Obviously the LGT, apart from the acceleration, did not impress them enough WRT to competition.

 

FWIW, I was picked for a test drive of the (then new) C5 Corvettes back in '97 when I lived in Louisville. They had two slalom-type courses set up in the parking lot of Churchill Downs. They had Vettes with the stock suspension, the Z51, and also the F45 (I think that was the option) with the controllable struts. Driving all three on the same course back-to-back really shows up the differences, which is something that you would never get doing test drives at different dealers over different roads. FWIW, about everyone loved the Z51 1st, the stock setup 2nd, and way down in 3rd was the F45 (or whatever that option was).

[rporter]

I was considering writing a letter to C&D about the snub of the Legacy, but it not being in the comparo may be a blessing in disguise. They didn't think much of it when they compared it to TSX, S40, and A4 in 2005. I am sure they would have hammered on it again. They are biased towards Honda products and aparently new VW ones too.

 

When that test came out last year, we had threads with folks bitching about C&Ds choices. I don't know if folks have been following the recent threads here about what other cars that current LGT owners considered, but the TSX was high on the list for many folks. The only beef was the lack of power (WRT the LGT). I can't fault C&D for liking that car best in the test. Honda does a damn good job.

[elpete77]

Honda Schmonda.

[DKB_SATX]

Car and Driver is actually my pick of the auto mags, but their collective breath does seem to stink of BMW butt. In October they awarded a comparo win to a 3-series that had enough problems to have made me force a dealer to buy it back (I wrote about it on my blog http://ghgsatx.blogspot.com/2005/09/maybe-3-series-conspiracy-theorists.html ) I wrote a letter to the editor this evening about the absence of the Legacy in their test. If they deign to respond they'll probably say they already knew they liked other cars better so they couldn't be bothered, or somesuch as that. *shrug* I know where my money is best spent, they don't have to buy the cars they test. I think that makes a big difference in the choice. I cross-shopped a TSX, the A3, and a Mazda6 (albeit well before the Mazdaspeed version came out) and the LGT was the car for me, hands-down. I haven't regretted my choice, even when I kvetch about having to let go of the wheel to change the stereo settings.

[elej]

regarding the original post ( i don't think anybody has pointed this out yet). according to C&D elegibility requirements for 10best 2006 consideration, the car must be either: 1. previous year winner 2. all new 3. significantly redesigned. so the the only Sub that would have met this criteria for 2006 is the Tribeca.

[rfd425]

Car & Driver, which I took for several years, is entertaining and probably my favorite of the mainstream car mags. However, there is no doubt in my mind that their ratings and comparo results are heavily influenced by advertising dollars. The most egregious example that I remember was when they raved about the Lincoln LS (which was brand new at the time) at the same time Ford bought tons of advertising for the car. There was even a special LS magazine that came with one issue, which I'm sure cost Ford a pretty penny. As the LS-specific advertising diminished, so did C&D's opinion of the car.

[wukilla98]

Only magazines I've seen that don't hold anything back in terms of quality and 'authentic' content are CAR magazine or EVO from mother England. Think they take cars more seriosuly there, and you really can't sell a POS like the Lincoln LS to them in the first place.

[harrydog]

I've subscribed to Car & Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend, Automobile, and Auto Week as well as a few of the foreign magazines on and off for the past 30+ years. Over that period, Car & Driver was always one of my favorites because of their irreverent humor and the fact that they generally push the cars pretty hard in their road tests.

But I feel as though they have gone down hill in recent years, partly because of the newer people who now write for the magazine. Also, I've never paid too much attention to their 10 Best lists.

I agree that some of the British car magazines seem to be much more independent and don't pull any punches with their analysis of the cars.

[skibum]

Haven't picked one up for a while, but sometimes I'd laugh out loud when reading the quips in "The Good,The Bad & The Ugly" section in the back of Car Magazine.

 

And yes, here's another vote for the old Car and Driver magazine. During the first half of the eighties it had the best editorial staff of any auto mag. (Davis, Ceppos, Sherman, Yates, Bedard, Setright, Csere, etc.)

[shiggins]

I've subscribed to C&D, Road and Track, Car Craft, Motor Trend, Hot Rod, etc. for long enough to know one constant.......the cries of "biased" or "good reviews paid for by advertising" are always leveled by people who are miffed that their personal car choice was not given a verbal bj in the latest comparo or write up.

If it were so easy as paying advertising bucks to get a good review, why wouldn't every car maker do it and win a ranking on Ten Best or win their comparo? Talk about cheap, effective advertising. I guess BMW and Honda are the only two manufacturers to figure it out. Subaru must be run by either idiots or morally righteous people who won't play the game, or they could've gotten in the latest comparo and beaten the new Jetta, especially since BMW wasn't paying money to win this one. Yeah right.

Look at the sales of cars, there's a reason Honda is well liked by car mags - because it's well liked by an awful lot of people that buy Hondas because they're very good cars. Ever hear of a BMW owner that didn't rave about how much they loved driving their car? The big car mags write for the majority, not a particular fan base, as a result, typically their reviews and rankings will reflect this.

The LGT is a niche market car. My parents certainly wouldn't buy one. Heck most of my friends wouldn't. The reason people aren't standing in line at the dealership to buy a LGT isn't because Subaru didn't buy enough ads in this month's car rag, it's because the car does not offer what they want for whatever reason.

Frankly I'm ok with that. It's more fun to feel I'm in on a secret with a relatively cheap, high performance sports sedan that few people have.

I do agree though that a magazine does need to be careful in avoiding bias. I'm sure car makers try and pressure magazines. I tend to keep subscriptions to magazines that will point out faults on cars, even if they love the car. I don't care about if it came in 1st or 4th in the comparo article (unlike some here obviously). I care that I can read the article about the particular car and get enough factual info to do my own personal ranking. I gave up on Motor Trend a while ago because I felt that even if they tested a Russian Lada, they'd only have glowing things to say about it. Every car has pluses and minuses, just tell them to me and let me make my own decision.

[rfd425]

I've subscribed to C&D, Road and Track, Car Craft, Motor Trend, Hot Rod, etc. for long enough to know one constant.......the cries of "biased" or "good reviews paid for by advertising" are always leveled by people who are miffed that their personal car choice was not given a verbal bj in the latest comparo or write up.

Sorry, pal, but I formed my opinion about bias & advertising dollars back when I drove an A4, which regularly traded first place results with 3-series BMW's. I had nothing to be miffed about. However, I often saw cars of dubious quality get very high marks when they first came out, and these tended to be cars that were being heavily promoted by their manufacturers. Without exception, these cars' ratings would drop over time, as the marketing push died down.

 

The Lincoln LS is the one that always sticks out in my mind, but it was a fairly regular occurrence. Do you really think C&D was going to pan the LS after Ford purchased a whole separate advertising magazine for it, to be included with the regular magazine? I remember they did a six-car comparison where the LS came in second against competition from BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc., but the Jaguar S-type (same platform as the LS) came in dead last. A year later, they rated the LS a middle-of-the-pack car, and a year after that, they basically said it was a POS (in car magazine speak).

 

I'm not saying their ratings are worthless; BMW's and Hondas consistently do well because they are generally very good cars. All I'm saying is that there is definite bias which is influenced by ad dollars, and I have no doubt that Subaru could achieve better results in magazine comparisons if they were willing to pay for it.

[DKB_SATX]

Again, they awarded the win in a comparison to a very broken 3-series in last October's issue... I think that's insulting to the motoring public who actually has to buy their cars rather than having them delivered for free by "media relations" types from the manufacturer. Perhaps it's not paid bias, just the bias of someone who gets their cool cars for free and therefore doesn't care if they're worth the money or not.

 

On a re-read of the "Everyday Heroes" article I saw at the tail end of a paragraph that they use the same rule as their 10 Best articles,they include the winner from the previous comparo and any cars that are new or significantly changed, so that'll be their reason for not including the LGT.