Pop quiz. “What do a Chrysler Cirrus, Chevrolet Blazer, Plymouth Acclaim and Ford Expedition have in common?” Did you say “none of them would ever tempt a pistonhead?” True enough, but not correct. “None of them ever dented the US sales charts”? Another good guess, but still incorrect. And the answer is: all of these vehicles have received the “North American Car (or Truck) of the Year” award. Yes, it’s that time of year again. Time for the automotive media to prove that indiscretion is the worst part of valor.
Here they come: the Motor Trend Car of the Year, 10Best, North American Car of the Year, International Car of the Year (Auto, Autocar, Stern, L'Automobile, etc.), World Car of the Year, Family Car of the Year, Urban Wheel Awards Car of the Year, Green Car of the Year and (for all I know) Polydactylic Cat Owners Car of the Year award. Multiply most of these by three (to include truck and SUV awards) then add in various sub-awards, and you’ve got enough gongs to satisfy the world’s monasteries for a decade.
As the list of past winners indicates, the value of these accolades is entirely dubious. Their methodology is usually vague, subjective and debatable. In many cases, the fine print isn’t even available for public (or Michael Karesh’s) scrutiny. One thing is for sure: an award doesn’t mean that a “Car of the Year” (COTY) is the best car on the road that year. Remember: a car only merits COTY consideration if it’s new or substantially changed for that year. How new? Many juries test cars that aren’t even on the market.
The candidates for the 2007 North American Car of the Year and North American Truck of the Year (NACOTY and NATOTY) awards were announced on Wednesday. In addition to sterling examples of automotive engineering and cutting edge design like the Dodge Caliber and Chevrolet Suburban, the awards’ crack team of automotive journalists is busy testing the as-yet-unreleased Ford Edge, GMC Acadia and Chrysler Sebring. This practice of testing pre-production models kills any hope that the panelists are testing “real” cars (i.e. press cars that weren’t carefully prepared by their manufacturers).
You’d be forgiven for thinking COTY awards are little more than a gift to car advertisers, who provide a self-appointed number of “elite” journalists with priority access to press cars, and then co-promote a new product with an old publication. It’s certainly an excellent excuse for carmakers like Renault (Alliance), Chevrolet (Citation), Plymouth (RIP, Volare) and Ford (Probe) to sell cars by touting their COTY award like they’d won the Nobel Prize.
If not pissing off your paymasters is the priority, it is perhaps significant that Car and Driver’s 2006 “10Best” awards considered 52 cars in new categories, including “Best Luxury Sports Car,” “Best Sports Coupe,” “Best Roadster,” “Best Sports Car” and “Best Muscle Car.” Perhaps C&D hopes persnickety pistonheads will spend so much time debating which car belongs in what category they’ll be too tired to dispute the winners.
To their credit, Car and Drivel Driver pits each year’s contenders against last year’s winners, and names the winner of that contest one of their 10Best. The concept is sound in theory, but flawed in execution. All cars are made to a price. When you’re comparing a vehicle that costs $15k to one costing $45k, proclaiming that one is “better” than the other is an inherently flawed judgment. To muffle accusations of price bias, C&D attempts to spread their selections across the price spectrum. In the process, they make the selection process even more arbitrary and artificial.
Anyway, I believe that any award purporting to name the best of anything for any given year should have stringent selection criteria; at least a bit more than “it’s the new kid on the block and we really like it a lot and we know what we’re talking about because we’re professional car journalists.” In the interests of fairness, and in direct contradiction to The Truth About Cars’ last two Cars of the Year (chosen by RF according to the above methodology), here’s how it should be done:
The judging should include a variety of published factors like performance, engineering, fuel economy, suitability to task for which they were designed, build quality, value for money and ergonomics. To qualify for consideration, a vehicle would have to achieve a minimum score. To win, it would have to be at the top of the ranking. Oh, and the panel should include both car journalists and non-professional pistonheads (that’s you).
I’ve never heard anyone say they bought a car because it received a Car of the Year award. That’s because no media outlet has the cojones (and/or money) to base awards strictly on merit– rather than the intersecting interests of publication and producer. Until then, we’ll keep getting meaningless hyperbole about meaningless awards.
I just have to add that Automobile's "Automobile of the Year" is a pretty well thought out award. It did help get me into my first WRX.
While I do think that the MT “Car of the Year” award is generally a useless sham, I don’t think the C&D Ten Best or Automobile All Stars awards are useless. I think they have a decent chunk of merit, even if flawed — they represent rough judgments about what some of the best cars in the world (or at least those cars that are available in the US) are. It’s hard to argue with longtime denizens of 10 Best/All Star lists like the BMW 3-series, the Honda Accord, the Mazda Miata, WRX — all are examples of excellent execution of a core concept, and I have some (although not full) faith that C&D and Automobile are “getting it right” far more often than they get it wrong.
I do wish more cars in the sub-$20k range and more cars geared towards economy made it more regularly — Honda Fit, Toyota Matrix anyone? — but I don’t have a problem with these lists having a bit of aspirational quality to them either.
Explorer never dented the sales charts?
Where were you in the late 90s?
I’ve never heard anyone say they bought a car because it received a Car of the Year award. That’s because no media outlet has the cojones (and/or money) to base awards strictly on merit– rather than the intersecting interests of publication and producer. Until then, we’ll keep getting meaningless hyperbole about meaningless awards.
Or maybe it’s because ultimately the criteria used to select the COTY, or more accurately, the weight given to each criterion point, is completely subjective.
Jonny: Seriously, would you have passed on the WRX if it had not won COTY? I look at these kinds of faux “contests” as merely a way to stimulate the PR profile of the brands in question and to give car geeks something to talk about. It’s a mutually beneficial relationship: The manufacturers get the writeups on their line of cars without having to take out a full page ad in the magazines, and the car geeks get to drive and obsess about all the cool new cars (which may explain why non-new models aren’t often considered: where would be the fun in that?)
As the saying goes, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
These awards, and the safety awards, seem to operate as after-the-fact justifications that consumers can use to rationalize the choices they’ve already made. I can imagine a husband trying to convince a reluctant spouse, “But honey, of course we should get the SUV instead of the mini van, after all, it won COTY and has a higher safety rating” – etc.
I know one person that bought a car because it was COTY:
The manager at the pizza shop I worked at in college bought a Renault (either Alliance or a LeCar; can’t remember).
I still laugh.
I don’t know anyone that’s bought a car based on it winning COTY but I know a lot of folks who string that little tid-bit at the end of their new car purchase rant: “It has ABS, TCS, was cheap…and won COTY!”
Frank — no, but I wasn’t considering the WRX seriously until that award… or at least until an article I read in Automobile about the WRX being the poor man’s Porsche.
I was coming off my third consecutive Jeep and had been thinking Liberty… but then I drove one and wasn’t thrilled.
I went into a Honda dealership to look at the new Civic this summer. The sales floor was plastered with Motor Trend posters and pamphlets about how the Civic won their car of the year award. I don’t read motor trend anymore.
In my opinion, “Car of the Year” awards are just meatier versions of those “list” articles that seem to pop up frequently on the internet (Forbes.com has a lot of these). I would much rather read a collection of personal opinions than a spreadsheet based selection process.
I was in San Antonio in the late 90s, Jazbo. Where were you when you read this article? I didn’t say anything about the Explorer.
Huh. I could have swore I read Explorer too. Funny how the brain works sometimes.
Eventually there will be enough categories of COTY that every car can be a winner. Sounds like kindergarten.
I agree with Frank’s suggestions for a methodology. Of course that would make it a journalistic enterprise rather than the simple marketing exercise that it is. But if anyone actually gets on board with it, I’ll gladly volunteer to evaluate the contenders.
Make mine the hyper-exotic class, please. Veyron vs. Carrera GT vs. Murcielago vs. Enzo.
Having participated several times recently in the Car and Driver 10Best judging, I have to say that though maybe it isn’t a stringent multi-week instrumented/laboratory affair, it is done with all of the cars that are contenders in one place, on one loop of pretty challenging rural Michigan roads, with the same drivers driving the same cars on the same days and immediately registering their opinions (on a numerical basis). In other words, it’s for real, and the judges–okay, other than me–are pretty competent evaluators of cars. Yates, Bedard, Phillips, Csere, Webster, the Robinsons Aaron and Peter (yes, C/D would spend the money every year to fly in several European judges, to ensure that we weren’t judging these cars simply by local standards), Winfield, Markus (then), etc. etc. etc. There usually were about a dozen to 15 judges.
Nobody was sitting around a conference table voting, nobody was doing this on a skidpad, slalom course and dragstrip, this was all real-world road driving.
When I did it, it would take me two, sometimes three full eight-to-five days to get through the field of cars, and that includes the ones you only have to drive for five miles to know that there’s no sense wasting any more time with them. I think C/D does a pretty good job of it.
I was in San Antonio in the late 90s, Jazbo. Where were you when you read this article? I didn’t say anything about the Explorer.
My bad…The eyes are the first thing to go. Or is it the concentration?
When transfering your points to the COTY of this side of the Atlantic (Europe), I agree with near all of them.
Some years ago the Truck of the Year Jury offered me to joint that organization. I rejected the offer.
I think there must always exists a line separating journalists from automakers.
If a journalist joints a COTY or TOTY, he is transgressing that line and joining the automakers side.
I think COTY is flawed by design. I go for best in class, by size/target market and-most importantly-price range.
Stephan,
Thanks for the background on C/D methodolgy. In truth, I didn’t buy my Integra (in 1987) and Accord (in 2004) entirely because they were C/D 10 Best, but it certainly helped to seal the deal. I have loved these cars, in part because I share C/D’s biases.
I also bought my Neon (1994) in part because I was influenced by whatever awards it won when it first came out. Not my finest decision, in hindsight.
The problem with COTY, MT et al is that they typically only include newly introduced cars, largely so that they can attract the advertising dollars associated with new vehicle launches. This opens things up for the Acclaims, Expeditions, Cirrus, Blazer, etc. to win in the year they are introduced if there are few competitive introductions.
Even the Neon in 1994.
I’ve always had much more respect for C&D’s 10Best rather than MT’s COTY. MT often seemed to have been skewed – in my mind, and certainly not something provable or tangible – by advertising budget. I need to check out Automobile, I guess.
On TTAC, cars are skewered as often as praised. Maybe C&D and MT need to balance with POSOTY, a 10Worst or 10MostInNeedOfWork to enhance their credibility. There goes the ad revenue!
COTY makes for nice page filler material and the mystery of which can be unveiled by just flipping to the conclusion page just past that pesky ad for maybe the car that won or a car somewhere else in the magazine.
I wonder how much a mfg pays a magazine for those showroom snippets which praise the respective mfg’s product in a comparo…
I’d like to work on WCOTY… it would be a lot more amusing but I’m sure most mfg’s are not fond of having acid spat at them for their indiscretions of production. I’m not a real positive person, what do I care if its the best… I’d rather read the bout for the title of worst car between say the small Caliber clones and I dunno… something from GM. A little public embarassment might help some companies (commitees) understand what flies and what doesn’t.
I love the back of CAR (deluxe?) magazine where they write nasties about cars. When you read “we’d rather walk” its probably not a good car. Conversely reading “if you can then you must” well you’re likely reading about a porsche and if you could have you should have by now or damn well should be planning on it in the future.
RF:
JoeC has a great idea. Why not “Top 10 ‘Oh no you didn’t’ new cars”?
Aspen, Sebring, Torrent, Optima, G5, Relay, SSR, Rainier, 9-2x, Raider, Tribute hybrid and BLS come to mind.
The year the Chevy Malibu came out it won the COTY award. Then it proceeded to become the MOST UNRELIABLE new car sold that year. After that, I never read another award issue of a magazine again.
OK, let’s do a “Ten Worst Automobiles Today” award for ’06, chosen by TTAC readers.
I’ll talk to my web guys.
Oh, come on, Mr. Williams! Every time I see a Cirrus or a Blazer I do a Snoopy dance.
Seriously, why no mention of Consumer Reports’ top picks? There is no pecuniary influence there.
Will it be the Ten Worst Automobiles ever, or the Ten Worst for model year 06? This could turn into an annual occurance, kind of like the Razzies, 10 Worst Dressed or Golden Fleece awards.
And for the winners? I suggest a “Flying V” trophy carved from a block of overripe cheese.
“…chosen by TTAC readers…”
The reason we (at Car and Driver) in the mid-1970s switched from Reader Poll cars of the year to editors-select cars was that the poll was obviously worthless: the winning results correlated exactly with whatever 911, Ferrari or Corvette we had most recently featured. A bunch of 15-year-olds (i.e. a large portion of our readership) were simply voting for their dream cars. Virtually none had ever driven one.
It can work that way with worst cars, too: I endlessly hear what a lousy car the Neon was, way too often from people simply repeating what they’ve read. I, on the other hand, bought one for my daughter when she started to drive, a twin-cam coupe. It was an excellent car, but you would never have learned that from the knee-jerk worst-car voters of the day.
Frank: Ten Worst Automobiles Today for each year
Stephan: how about a blend (to be decided later) of our opinion and theirs, weighting towards ours (of course and sorry folks). I'm thinking a dependency ratio of 1 to 10.
Stephan, you mean the 1968 Corvette WASN’T the “best all around car” produced that year?
Stephan,
Let me clarify my position on the Neon, which I owned for nearly 10 years. In 1994, it had 130 hp (150 eventually in one version as you point out) vs. 105-110hp for the Civic/Corolla crowd. I quite liked the handling, steering, visibility and gearbox.
I didn’t like that DCX chose the “Hi” campaign that feminized the car (you can see why they went to the other extreme with its successor). I didn’t like that a lot of things broke more quickly than they have on my Hondas (alternator, brakes, AC, weatherproofing, etc.)
After almost 10 years and 100K miles, the engine leaked over a quart of oil a month and I needed a new clutch, so I donated the car.
My biggest 2 issues were the lousy safety because it was not a terribly stiff platform and the aweful resale value (hence the donation).
But otherwise, it was always fun to drive.
I tend not to put much stock in such contests from magazines where over 50% of the pages are covered in ads and the rest is vapid, mind-numbing content.
At least C&D had the cojones to print (I think it was from Yates) its assessment of the Chevette as a “s***box.”
Sure, it was an easy mark, but that still buys cred in my book, years later.
Side Note: RE the Cirrus pic above…is it my imagination or does the butt end of the Cirrus look like the origin of the bangled BMW 6 series butt?
Edit: No, wait…the Cirrus butt looks better!
I know this will indicate my approximate age, but my favorite MT Coty was 1968 when the Pontiac GTO won because….wait for it…..wait for it….. it had a RUBBER BUMPER that when you hit it with a hammer it would snap back into place. I think it was at that point and age I gave up on Coty’s forever. Ah yes, one other one, Consumer Reports 1973 Coty (or Best Buy or whatever it was called), the 1973 Ford 4 door LTD (15 mpg on a good day). They put that issue out about one month before the 1973 gas crisis hit. I spent that fall walking down to the local gas station with a one gallon can and dumping it into my Fiat 850.
Caveat emptor.
It’s not just car mags that do this. Virtually every industry gives out awards, and many of them get alot of publicity.
I’ll bet you that the annual New Car Issue! and COTY! issue bring in the most revenue for them.
Hey Wilkinson: why does every car mag editor splatter exclamation points all over the front covers? It still doesn’t make me want to look at a Grand Prix.
It’s COTY time soon up here too. AJAC’s Testfest takes place at the end of next month, and like C/D it’s solid back to back real driving evaluation over five days. We work in teams, assigned to categories, most of which consist of three to ten vehicles. Trucks and SUVs also go through an off-road portion as well as road and highway and sports cars are tested on the track too.
I love the back of CAR (deluxe?) magazine where they write nasties about cars. When you read “we’d rather walk†its probably not a good car. Conversely reading “if you can then you must†well you’re likely reading about a porsche and if you could have you should have by now or damn well should be planning on it in the future.
I love CAR magazine for their bluntness and writing style. They will call a car out, any car out, if it is rubbish. Last month’s magazine (or the previous months) had a quarter page article on the new Boxster Cayman (not the Cayman S, the Cayman). It clearly said in print “do not buy this car” and listed the reasons why.
I hate to disappoint Joe C, but since it happened on my watch, Yates did _not_ say the Chevette was a scheissbox. He said something like–can’t remember exactly–much as it might look like one, it really wasn’t. (Brock didn’t mean it; he was trying to be nice. After all, I wrote the cover blurb: “The Most Important Car Detroit Has Ever Built.” So sue me.)
And NewtoLA, it had no exclamation marks. I never wrote a cover blurb with what in the trade is called a screamer. I think that started round about the time it became de rigueur to turn every title into a pun–which was anathema in my day–and the most successful blurbs had to have numbers: “118 Ways to Produce an Orgasm,” “99 Ways to Lengthen Your Dick,” “15 Vegetables That Will Make You Thin,” “10 Best Cars…”
I kinda liked the recent “Four-gasm”…
Gotta go back and read the article again, apparently. I think I’ve got it in the 50 Year retrospective book. I need a reason to laugh again this weekend, anyway. Maybe it was in Brock’s look back at his article in the 50th Ann. issue?
Urgh more “X of the Year” and “Top Y Lists” from the mainstream media (not just for cars).
Typical crap that just prooves how lazy and sold out most of the media is.
I remember I believe it was 2002 when Motor Trend gave the new T-Bird car of the year. HA! Good call!
Motor Trends Car of the Year winners:
2006 Honda Civic
2005 Chrysler 300
2004 Toyota Prius
2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe / Sedan
2002 Ford Thunderbird
2001 Chrysler PT Cruiser
2000 Lincoln LS
1999 Chrysler 300M
1998 Chevrolet Corvette
1997 Chevrolet Malibu
1996 Dodge Caravan
1995 Chrysler Cirrus
1994 Ford Mustang
1993 Ford Probe GT
1992 Cadillac Seville Touring Sedan
1991 Chevrolet Caprice Classic LTZ
1990 Lincoln Town Car
So it was, ha.
Ok wait, I guess I missed that 99 dick lengthener tricks article in C/D, wouldn’t mind getting my hands on it. Not that I need it or anything but, well, you know…
At this rate, each car sold in the US will itw own award by 2010, and two awards a few years afterwards.
It’s time for dishonorable mentions from someone other than Consumer Reports, featuring categories such as:
– Worst example of a Detroit 2.5 Mexican and Canadian, Car and Truck passed off as ‘Merican
– Worst example of a American-built Car passed off as Japanese/Korean/German/Chinese/Brittish
– Worst Badge/platform Engineering
– Most Dubious Captive Import
– Computer Interface Most Likely To Distract and Kill You
– Best Car and Truck To Advertise Your Testosterone (or pubic inches) Deficiency
– Beached Whale Look-Alike of the Year
– SUV with the Highest Center of Gravity
– and to compete with Ward’s Auto, 10 Worst Engines
TTAC is now fully committed to establishing the “Ten Worst Automobiles Today” awards.
I’ve IM’ed Frank Williams on this extensively. Here’s what we’re thinking so far…
TTAC names the ten worst cars offered for sale in the United States (sorry rest of the world, we’ll get to you) during one calender year.
1. Readers’ nominations (with explanations)
2. TTAC selects 20 finalists from the readers’ lists
3. TTAC staff and readers vote on the list (TTAC staff votes count more, at a ratio to be named later)
4. TTAC reveals the TWAT’s.
In the interest of interest, there’d be term limits. No car could receive a TWAT award more than two years in a row.
Any ideas how to make this better?
Oh, and I love starlightmica’s “sub awards.” Would that be guilding the lilly?
I would love to see a subcategory among the Ten Worst Automobiles Today that Karesh could review using his statistcal analysis to come up with the most unreliable among the TWATs. Indeed, the car model possessing the most dissatisfaction among owners could top the Car Unreliability Nixing Temperamental index. Or just be the biggest CUN….well, you know…. It could be the crown jewel of the Flying Vagina award. Sometimes it is just a pleasure being sophmoric on TTAC!
Can we include CANADA.after all we build them,and we buy them.and I think LESELEY W is one of us. Somebody correct me if I`m wrong.I think that all calls sold in the USA.are also sold in Canada.
February 14, 2007: Rick Wagoner’s secretary pages him:
Mr. Wagoner, there’s a Mr. Robert Farago here to see you. I know you don’t have him on your schedule, but Mr. Farago has personally brought these couple of gold “flying vagina” statuettes as our vehicles have won some new TWAT award.
Stephan – Dang it! I can’t find the article in Padgett’s book, and I gave away my 50-year Anniversary C&D issue. However, I will take your word for it, since I’m sure directly calling the Chevette a “s***box” would have made waves in print. Funny, how that’s how I remember it, though. Maybe that was what Yates was really attempting. You’re forgiven for the cover, you were trying to sell magazines.
Hmm, but that means the moniker is still up for grabs! How about calling the “Ultimate TWAT” this year’s “Grand S***box?”
Ultimate TWAT. Lovely. Has a nice ring to it.
Yup, Mikey, I’m one of you, a fellow Canuck. In fact… I will be picking up vehicles from GM for the next three weeks.
But – there are cars sold in the states that aren’t available up here and vice versa (EVO comes to mind, we don’t have it, and we’ve long had certain diesels that they are just now getting down there).
The TWAT awards sound like fun. Chances are few of us will have driven any of them, but don’t let that stop us from dumping on crappy cars.
All the mentions of C/D remind of the (bar none) best car review I’ve ever read. It was a C/D review of the Yugo. It must’ve been in the ’80s, and if memory serves it was by Csere. (OTOH, I’ve drand a lot of beer since then, so my memory doesn’t serve me so well….) Anyways, Yugo was obviously not an advertiser with C/D because the review was merciless — absolutely hilarious though.
Anybody else remember that one? Better yet, anybody got the back issue? Willing to scan it, for old time’s sake….?
Just for the sake of accuracy I don’t believe that the Plymouth Acclaim ever won MT’s COTY. If I remember correctly the issue pitted the Acclaim and her sister, the Dodge Spirit against the Ford Thunderbird and Mercury Cougar (this was the rear wheel drive Couger) since they were the only new or significantly changed models that year (I believe it was 1989).
I also remember MT saying that scoring wise it was the closest or one of th closets COTY competitions ever. The t-Bird got it by just a few points over the Dodge Spirit. If anyone remembers ths differently please let me know.
That would have been back when the Car of the Year was domestic, and there was a separate Import Car of the Year for imports. C&D similarly used to split the Top Ten 50/50. I cannot recall who desegregated first.
I’m generally against Top lists of any sort. They’re for lazy people who don’t want to do their own research. There are plenty of these people. I’ve personally heard many people justify their purchase by saying it won MT’s COTY.
My general take on such lists:
http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/comparison_tests.php
Like others here, I have higher regard for Automobile’s and CD’s awards. There was a time I eagerly awaited the Ten Best issue. But that was a while back.
To my knowledge, CR has never clearly specified the system used to assign scores to cars. Despite serving consumers, they tend to be about as transparent as the Chinese Communist Party.
A “Ten Worst” wouldn’t be quite so bad. While among good cars some will be better for a specific person than others, a bad car will tend to be a bad car for everyone.
The difficulty here is that there just aren’t that many truly bad cars. And I’m saying this as one of the most critical people alive. The Toyota Echo might be the only car I’ve ever given a single star in a review over at Epinions, and it’s not around anymore. There are many bland, uninspired cars, but not many outright bad ones. Often the easiest thing to criticize on a car is the styling, and that’s subjective.
Many of the worst cars available today are about to leave us: GM’s minivans, the Saturn ION (which has improved since I last drove one), the regular Mitsubishi Lancer (but not the Ralliart or Evo), the Ford Taurus (which my mother faithfully keeps buying in wagon form), the Mitsubishi Outlander.
Maybe the Kia Amanti? Sure, it’s an awful car for enthusiasts. But I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend one for someone who wants much of the luxury of a Lincoln Town Car at a much lower price.
In the case of GM’s cars, many can be disappointing in their base trims but quite good in their premium trims.
So, I’m having a hard time figuring out where ten bad cars would come from. Not being great isn’t the same as being bad.
One thing that has always perplexed me are people who get upset when a car magazine recommends a car that turns out to be unreliable. None of these magazines ever claims to evaluate reliability.
As for using my own reliability data for this, I won’t be issuing best lists, because the run counter to my mission. Worst lists might make more sense. Need the data first–I cannot simply pull reliability stats out of thin air.
Ehhh, what can you do. People like to give out awards. People like competition and then recognizing some arbitrary definition of excellence. Everybody complains that an offensive lineman will never win this Heisman, then they sit down and cast their ballot for the latest overhyped quarterback. It’s human nature.
When do the nominations begin? That ought to be a fun thread, and I’m looking forwards to putting in my 2 cents.
One could argue that the better our WCOTY is the better cars are in general. The lowest of the low is a good litmus test for the minimum in terms of percieved quality and demonstrated driving dynamics. I suspect that other countries have access to a slightly wider spectrum of build quality and performance.
I bought my car based off of numerous articles (the Subaru Legacy Spec-B), test drives, etc. I never really looked to see if it won an award.
I don’t buy music based on grammy’s.
I don’t buy DvDs based on Oscar trophies (though it does make me more curious).
Awards are for folks to pay attention to the product…not to make their decision on. There are many awards in life that happen with unwritten criteria…many of which that you can’t give the award to the same person/thing two years in a row, etc. There are other award shows with just the exact opposite criteria (didn’t Green Day win 2 years in a row…for the same album?).
I think you have a valid gripe…but I don’t think you give your readers enough credit for cognitive ability. :) Everything in life is subjective…that’s just how life is.
windsword:
Just for the sake of accuracy I don’t believe that the Plymouth Acclaim ever won MT’s COTY.
Nowhere did I it state it did. The Acclaim won the NORTH AMERICAN COTY award.
I just got back from Europe, so I’m late into this debate.
But anyone that thinks the Neon is a good car is nuts! I fix ’em so I know that for every owner who has escaped disaster, there’s another nine who didn’t. I guess these satisfied owners will be the first out of the blocks to buy a Geely.
As for the AJAC con-job, don’t be misled. AJAC only “tests” this years model introductions. So a really good car from last year, will not be mentioned, while some much less attractive new introduction will get the COTY award. Last year the Mazda3 lost out to the Kia Rio5. Because the former was never in the running. So don’t kid yourselves, people, ALL COTY(s) are spin doctor politics at their most dishonest.