Now that Csaba Csere has left Car and Driver– hang on. Has he left? I forgot that buff books have a two month lead time. Two months? Can you imagine TTAC (or anyone else) trying to write anything even remotely relevant about automobiles two months in advance? Anyway, now that Csere has left C and D, nothing. No change. Seriously. I could summarize this supercar comparo without reading it. Here goes. Viper – fast, rough, dangerous. Mercedes – heavy, expensive, OMG thrust, handles better than it should. ZR1 – Shitty interior but mind-blowing fun. Such a deal. Lambo – Insane! Let’s have a look. Yup. Nailed it. OK, I thought the Lambo would win. But who cares? Does the fact that I find these articles interminable mean that I’m finally entering the “get off my lawn” phase of my life? In any case, can Car and Driver please stop all that “don’t hate us for loving fast cars” crap? In fact, I’m beginning to do just that– if not for the reasons they suggest. I swear I’ve been reading the “we heart dinosaurs” routine for twenty years now. Enough.
I miss LJK Setright.
I like(d) Car and Driver.
I thought the pseudo-mea culpa article they did recently (Ten Stupidest Auto Magazine Award Winners In Retrospect) was actually pretty good. I hoped for a little more self-analysis, but all in all it was a rare piece of self-effacement in what’s typically really dull coverage.
Yup, you’ve entered the “get off my lawn” phase. Pornography gets old after repeating itself over and over.
Wow, I’m in trouble. I’m 25 and have apparently reached the “get off my lawn” phase. Honestly, I stopped reading these types of articles when I realized that it was highly unlikely that I would ever own a new supercar. It seemed depressing to read about stuff I couldn’t have. Then again, I also now prefer to think about how I can get women I know to sleep with me rather than dreaming of sleeping with Angelina Jolie.
Now, do a <20k supercar shootout…c4 vette, older wrx/sti, evo 8, original viper,etc. Maybe make it interesting and throw in a Buick GNX, RX7 turbo, Supra Turbo in.
See, I would have assumed the Vette won as a value leader. As if value is something people look for in supercars.
My five bucks yearly subscriber price copy of C&D arrived a couple days ago.
No more subscribing here, even five bucks is too much to read about a bunch of guys with their noses pointed upwards, writing about cars many of us would be unable to test drive let alone afford.
Yeah, it’s their magazine and they can write any way they what and cover what they want to but…
reminiscing about the C&D of yore when “commoner cars” received coverage and C&D’s “voice” was aimed at the masses I detect “classism” in C&D from the past several years.
You younguns’ out there in Webville; if the chance arises and you see copies of C&D from the 70s or 80s at the thrift store grab a few and observe the differences twixt then and now.
Observe how the once mighty have fallen in this hardly-humble Disgruntled Old Coot’s opinion.
So true, so true. My grandmother has been gifting me a subscription to C&D for, well, ever. I still read it, but it is difficult at times. I mean, just how excited can you get reading an article about a car you saw on the interwebs a month or two ago? And the predictability grows old, too. How many times will a BMW win a comparison, only to have the writer insert a forced ‘joke’ about their BMW bias?
If only TTAC came out in magazine form, daily, no less.
Is Bedard still there?
You are not alone. The auto rags have been entirely predictable for the last ten years. That’s why I stopped subscribing to them, or even bothering to read them at the magazine shop.
One cannot help but sense a certain envy on the part of TTAC for not having access to these vehicles.
I’d like to read more about cars please, and see less flaming of other sources of automotive information. I’m talking to you, Farago.
Just re-reading some of PJ O’Rourke’s auto writing. Shame he’s all politics all the time these days.
Buff book write-ups with C6 Corvettes are always kind of funny. The progression has gone like:
1st. “The Corvette (Z51 or base) is awesome! Best value performance car ever! Beats Viper, 911, Boxster, and SL550!”
2nd. “To be honest, the new Corvette had tons of room to improve. But baby, the new dry-sump Z06 is where it’s at! It beats the F430, Gallardo, GTR, and 911 Turbo!”
3rd. “The Z06 actually was alot more scary to drive at the limit than we first led on. In fact it detracted a lot from the track experience becuase we couldn’t go full blast. But hey, forget all about that Z06 because the ZR1 is here and good Corvette times are here again! It is so great that it beats out the Sl65 and Murcielago!”
“In any case, can Car and Driver please stop all that “don’t hate us for loving fast cars” crap? In fact, I’m beginning to do just that– if not for the reasons they suggest. I swear I’ve been reading the “we heart dinosaurs” routine for twenty years now. Enough.”
I’ve noticed a lot of buff book/buff site editors are still harping on that. We get it. You grew up driving muscle cars, and you think that a car can’t be fun unless it’s got RWD and elevendybillion horsepower. Please though, for the love of God, STOP trying to disprove global climate change (blogs.edmunds.com/karl), stop telling us that emissions regulations will make it 1973 again, and stop telling us that every interesting car in the world will disappear now that Obama is president.
I’ve agreed with that predictable criticism for years (while still holding most of their subscriptions), but recently I think most magazines have been trying to improve. I’m not entirely sure if they’re responding to CAR and EVO or to the internet, but I feel like I’m seeing more roadtrips, better editorials and more interesting comparisons.
Whatever they think they’re doing, it’s too little too late anyway. I can now come to sites like this for editorials far, far superior to theirs, and video reviews are way more honest, and exciting, than those in article form.
I get them for free. I used to read them cover to cover, but it seems they have become so repetitive. Before, they would at least talk about different cars than the other each month. They staggered their articles. Now it seems like each magazine is the same 4-6 times over. Plus all their news are old news by the time they are printed. Sites like these give you automotive journalism way faster. Almost to the hour.
I have kept a bunch of old C&D, Motor Trend and Automobile mags from the mid 1980’s. It seems there were better articles and more appropriate content for those times compared to today. The whole Supercar thing was lost on me after the first 5 years of comparison articles. How many times have we seen “We drive the fastest exotics over 200mph!” I mean who really cares about the Viper? Ugh. TTAC kicks all over paper rags.
I’ve got to add, I’m with TheRealCarGuy on this one – I am surprised you even bring up that mag on this site. Why? Who cares?
With the cost of a subscription under $10-20, you could argue the photography alone is worth it. Not my thing though, I just buy the odd hi-fi magazine. Now, more cars and car stuff please.
Please though, for the love of God, STOP trying to disprove global climate change (blogs.edmunds.com/karl), stop telling us that emissions regulations will make it 1973 again, and stop telling us that every interesting car in the world will disappear now that Obama is president.
Emissions regulations won’t make it 1973 again because there have been engineering improvements since then. But there still is always a tradeoff, even if we don’t have to go back to 1973. The truth is the improvements in engineering mean that we could have more emissions improvements and not have to go back to 1973– just the average car won’t be as much fun for enthusiasts as it otherwise would be. Just take a look at all the reviews at this site suggesting that you really need to get the less fuel efficient V6 or whatever stronger engine on a car. (Contrary to their rep in this thread, C&D actually, unlike this site, preferred the 2.0L inline 4 on the A4 due to the higher torque at lower rpms, where it matters for most drivers and most real driving.) Remember that companies like not just Daimler Benz and BMW but also VW end up paying CAFE fines already– the domestics don’t by producing loss leaders that cost them money on every sale, primarily for political reasons.
But all that may be a price worth paying. Certainly– to the chagrin of buffs at this site as well– cars have improved to the point where they’re all sufficient for getting people where they need to go, and plenty of people find it sufficient for a car to be an appliance.
It’s way too early to say for sure what will happen in an Obama Administration. Events, particularly the price of oil (which can be affected by taxes, certainly) would have a larger effect than most policies that could politically be passed. The price of gas is why US greenhouse gas contributions increased much more slowly under GWB than under Clinton, and under Bush than in Europe (they were starting from a higher petrol price base due to gas taxes, and so the price increase of commodity oil didn’t have as dramatic an effect at the pump in percentage terms.) The price of oil drowned out any political effort, which tends to be symbolic anyway.
Now, if we were to actually do what’s apparently necessary to stop climate change, it would require most interesting cars to be only available to an even more exclusive group than they currently are. The composition of sales during 2008, where the Prius and other small cars surged during high prices and then just as dramatically fell along with gas prices, shows what the average fleet would look like if serious action were taken. I suspect that what will actually happen will be like the regulations in Europe which, other than the gas taxes, are more about symbolism than substance.
I’ve gotta agree. C/D has jumped the shark, though it seems to have improved ever-so-slightly since flipping the bird at people upset over the redesign.
One recent trend I’ve noticed in C/D is that they’re regularly getting two articles out of every car, in back-to-back issues. The first is usually a preview of some sort, followed by a road test or comparo the next month. Seriously guys, just because you have the car available doesn’t mean you should milk two articles out of it. (I actually finally noticed the trend when RF listed the cars compared in the newest issue, two of which were given short takes in the last issue.)
Alja, your comment made me laugh, since I noticed the exact same Corvette pattern in C/D’s review of the ZR1. I immediately thought, “When did the Z06 end up in the doghouse?” Unfortunately, it’s a pattern followed for many cars by buff books, though they usually wait until a new model comes out 5+ years later.
Sanman111 : Honestly, I stopped reading these types of articles when I realized that it was highly unlikely that I would ever own a new supercar. It seemed depressing to read about stuff I couldn’t have.
I hear that. Do we even need to read a Lambo review? No shit, “it’s fast.” Everyone knows that. (Although just as an American, it’s kinda gratifying to see the ZR-1 waste all those expensive cars.)
Never really been a C&D fan. Also, the last issue of Motor Trend I picked up had articles that read so much like press releases, I doubt I’ll ever buy one again. I’m still partial to Automobile because I enjoy their features and Ezra Dyer, though.
What a great commentary. Laughing at how true. My father subscribed to Car and Driver & Road and Track from 1980 to 2003 and I read them cover to cover every month. I liked Csabe Csere and Paul Frere. The mags did a few separate editorial articles about how autos were getting heavier, more fragile, getting worse gas mileage, and becoming exponentially more expensive relative to income, but never detailed this in individual reviews. One had a seminal article for me by Jackie Stewart on how to drive fast around a track.
I migrated to Motor Trend and Automobile Magazine as an adult and they were revealing at first, when they started, but likewise they became just paid advertising in editorial form. Always praise for the new model with one minor complaint toward the end of the article – complete formula. Finally the only use was for the pictures and data, and as we know, that doesn’t tell the story.
I am thankful for The Truth about Cars. Now let’s get in some cars, old or new, and talk the true grit.
I must say, I think that this C&D article is above par. Do I want the Viper or Vette? Kinda also wondering though – bumpy off-camber hairpin 60 mph – 20 mph, Astra or Focus?
I liked the C&D story and I found its conclusion useful and credible. The ZR1 won out mainly on daily livability — ride and ergonomics. The brakes and of course the incredible engine also drew high marks.
Frankly, I wouldn’t trust TTAC to make an equally useful determination. No offense but you lack the objectivity, experience, and automotive acumen.
I don’t find TTAC to be in a “get off my lawn” mode at all. On the contrary: when I visit this site I feel like I have fallen into a roomful of 14 year-old boys in their I-Hate-Everyone-and-Everything stage. The relentless vituperation deployed at 360 degrees gets to be a bit much. The web is an ice-cold medium but Come On. How about you kids wash off that black eyeliner and go get some fresh air?
stopped buying buff books when i turned 19ish…
stopped reading their websites when i was 24ish…
imo, their only value is to fill magazine racks at airports – easy to flip through in 15 minutes waiting for a plane…
Come on now. Car and Driver has to be one of the best print magazines currently available, and I think it’s required reading for most enthusiasts. Whereas TTAC does well covering (and critiquing) the industry, Car and Driver delivers plenty of entertaining coverage pertaining to new cars. I think this is a great site, but with instrumented test results and access to a wide selection of cars (including some of the juiciest available on these shores), Car and Driver is still the best resource for road tests of cars sold in this market. So, I’ll read TTAC daily for the industry dirt, and Car and Driver monthly to scratch that enthusiast itch. I don’t see C&D as competition for TTAC; it’s possible to read both (plus Automobile for Kitman’s editorials, Autoblog for their e-Bay finds, and several Hemmings rags for my interests in classic cars). It’s also possible to love Top Gear for what it is – a no apologies, extremely entertaining British mag that caters strictly to the enthusiast. So what if they think that most Americans are Walmart people from flyover country? I can laugh about that too, since there is plenty of truth in it.
Automotive pornography at its finest.
How many teenagers, while sneaking a peek at C&D while their parents were away, have secretly thought of sliding a paint can over the tailpipe of their ’92 Civic?
What we’ve seen happen to C&D is the same thing that’s happening across all print-media, it just can’t keep up with the WWW.
What’s the point of being buying a car magazine when by the time it hits the bookshelf I’ve already read all there is to know from the net?
Adapt or die.
The rankings are annoying, especially in this review. Daily drivers etc. are fine for this type of article, but when you get into this range of vehicle it’s ridiculous. With most of these vehicles you’re buying artwork and just like paintings and sculptures, everyone has their own tastes and preferences that are next to impossible to quantify. The best car is the one that makes you happy, not some journalist.
mcs :
January 28th, 2009 at 8:25 am
The rankings are annoying, especially in this review. Daily drivers etc. are fine for this type of article, but when you get into this range of vehicle it’s ridiculous. With most of these vehicles you’re buying artwork and just like paintings and sculptures, everyone has their own tastes and preferences that are next to impossible to quantify. The best car is the one that makes you happy, not some journalist.
Exactly why I stopped reading them. This is all they do now. The last good article I read was 2+ years ago when John Phillips trecked across Canada in a Corvette. And before that it was several years since the previous one.
I remember when they used to do comparos like Taurus-Intrigue-Camry (the Intrigue won). Also, the 8-car economy sedan comparo that saw the new ’99 Protege win (and then Mazda tout it heavily). Or how about the near-luxury comparo that included the ’98ish Diamante, ES300, Mazda Millenia S, etc.? No more. Nothing but supercar, supercar, supercar. I could care less about those.
Magoo,
I have to disagree with you. Of course the corvette is more livable, but who cares. I have yet to see anyone daily drive a Lamborghini (except maybe Jeremy Clarkson). Yes you buy a Vette if you want a supercar you can buy everyday. You get the Lambo to take home the supermodel. Honestly, who cares which toy is more sensible. That like saying Matchbox cars are better than Hot Wheels because they are more realistic. If you can afford one of these, you can afford a Camry to drive to work. I think I respect Top Gear more for saying that their choices are completely unrealistic and have no basis ,but they don’t give a f*ck because supercars are about what makes you feel good.
I’m in my “get off my lawn” phase, having read C&D since the early 70s. I let my subscription lapse about five years ago, and now only occasionally buy a coy at the bookstore.
C&D has lost it’s edge, in large measure because it’s best writers (Yates, Jeanes, Sherman, Bedard, Phillips, et. al.) have either aged or gone elsewhere. The younger writers who remain at C&D seem to have had the fun wrung out of them by whatever editorial policies they are obligated to follow.
In fairness, the internet has made publishing any magazine increasingly difficult. And cars have become, well, a lot more boring than they used to be.
The action is in motorcycles now, rather than cars. A motorcycle mag reader may be able to pop $8,000 on a 600cc sport bike that will accelerate as fast as a Porsche, Ferrari or Lambo; cars that are utterly out of reach for that reader.
C&D has also missed out in it’s lack of coverage of the current youth-oriented trends of import racing and customization.
It’s sad to see a venerable magazine stumble, but in many respects, they did it to themselves.
I just really despise C&D. Have for years.
It’s the poster child for “cars have no reason to exist besides performance” automotive “journalism.”
Oh, God, I am so TIRED of the truly hundreds of pages per year each of the typical car magazines will publish covering the same information over and over and over again about cars like Viper, Corvette, Ferrari, and so on. Meanwhile, those of us who buy “normal” vehicles will be lucky to see ONE page of coverage for any vehicle we might actually purchase some day.
Worse yet from C&D is the insane “comparo” tests, wherein it doesn’t matter what value any vehicle might otherwise have, but “performance on the track” will be the only criteria for judging its worth. Once again, “meanwhile, most people purchase cars for efficient commuting, or comfortable cruising, or some utility” and so on — but generally don’t do much driving on race tracks, at all.
As far as I’m concerned, it’s all just marketing towards the proverbial twelve-year-old kid with a Countach poster on his bedroom wall.
Still, most of these rags are so cheap on a subscription basis that they make entirely equitably-priced bathroom reading material. I do subscribe to a couple of them (C&D not included), for that very usage….
“By Robert Farago
Now that Csabe Csere has left Car and Driver– hang on. Has he left? I forgot that buff books have a two month lead time. Two months? Can you imagine TTAC (or anyone else) trying to write anything even remotely relevant about automobiles two months in advance? Anyway, now that Csere has left C and D, nothing.”
No offense but reading as one Hungarian surname is breaking the balls publicly of another Hungarian-named person is giving me the warm feeling of my homeland (Hungary, that is) and my past journalistic experience. ;)
For some reason Koestler’s words come into my mind: “(…) to be Hungarian is a collective neurosis.”
“Still, most of these rags are so cheap on a subscription basis that they make entirely equitably-priced bathroom reading material. I do subscribe to a couple of them (C&D not included), for that very usage….”
Hah, good idea! I’ve got the New Yorker, The Week etc in my bathroom – perhaps I need some softer readings so I will finish faster… :D
Honestly, the suspense in finding C/D in the mailbox the last two months has been to find out if Csere is still in the rag and if he’s just going to disappear like Yates did.
” I’m finally entering the “get off my lawn” phase of my life? ”
Loved it, that’s a classic :)
It sure would be nice to have Setright or Frere around. Sports Car International isn’t too bad, even though they cater to a more specific crowd. And I’ll pick up the occasional Evo issue, I do like their comparisons…mainly for the illustrative descriptions and trips they take (what C&D’s Ohio route isn’t as exciting as France?). Otherwise, the rest is trash and the web takes care of major auto news or reviews.
Regarding motorsickles, I’ve found a similar trend in moto rags over the last few years. It’s ALL about the latest 600s or 1000s, flogged on the track (with a token “road test”) and rated according to lap times that are separated by fractions of a second. The winner isn’t the best all rounder, or the one that tugs your heart strings, it’s the one that is cheapest and fastest – which becomes THE choice of squids everywhere.
Sometimes they slip up and praise a Ducati or MV or Benelli for how amazingly “soulful” or communicative they are (and then dump on them for their “Italian” quirks, like I haven’t heard that in every single review of an Italian machine since the dawn of time), but they usually deny them the crown because of their price and perceived unreliability/cost of maintenance/poor city dynamics.
Most solo reviews follow a formula, sticking to the white-bread descriptions, PR copy, and standard brand stereotypes. Sometimes someone like Peter Egan actually provides a meaningful review or article; most of the time you just flip through and can predict what will be said based on generalities.
Someone once said there are no bad bikes, just some that are better than others. Having ridden many machines, and read the reviews associated with them, I disagree – there are bad bikes, but the magazines will never admit it.
It’s not particularly difficult to pinpoint when C&D began their descent into mediocrity. It was right around the time they were bought out from Ziff-Davis and absorbed by Peterson Publishing Company. You know, the guys that make crap like Motor Trend such an enthralling read.
Even though David E. Davis made a valiant attempt to bring Automobile magazine into the same ‘gonzo’ mode as the earlier C&D, he never quite got the same feel.
When I was a kid, I read C/D (which has become utterly terrible in the past fifteen years), saw tests of Porsches, Corvettes, and Lamborghinis, and resolved to put myself in a position where I could afford them.
Today’s kids apparently read C/D, see tests of Porsches, Corvettes, and Lamborghinis, and then start crying like a bunch of emo suicide intenders at the fact that their own laziness and low achievement will forever bar them from getting behind the wheel.
It’s possible to go out and buy a four-year-old SL65 right now for seventy grand. If you can’t work up the economic juice in this country to buy a seventy-grand car, you ain’t trying very hard.
I don’t think I’ll ever understand the people who want to hasten the day when we’re all driving one-liter hybrids. If you think it will be “fun”, book a plane to Europe, rent a one-liter Fiesta, then tell me how much “fun” it is.
rudiger :
“It’s not particularly difficult to pinpoint when C&D began their descent into mediocrity. It was right around the time they were bought out from Ziff-Davis and absorbed by Peterson Publishing Company. You know, the guys that make crap like Motor Trend such an enthralling read.
Even though David E. Davis made a valiant attempt to bring Automobile magazine into the same ‘gonzo’ mode as the earlier C&D, he never quite got the same feel.”
Great theory but for a few holes in it. Car and Driver was never owned by the Petersen Publishing Company. CandD is owned by Hachette Filipachi Media U.S., as are Road & Track and Cycle World.
You are probably confusing CandD with the other Ann Arbor mag, Automobile, which is now owned by the same company that owns Motor Trend — Source Interlink Media, formerly Primedia, formerly Petersen.
The difference between CandD under Davis and Automobile under Davis was simply that he had become older and mellower. As his interests matured so did his focus.
If you’re gonna make fun of C&D, at least spell Csaba‘s name right!
doctorv8
Oops. Text amended.
Jack Baruth,
I assume that I am young enough to be considered one of your young emo suicide intenders. Laziness and low achievement (I just turned 25 and am less than a year away from having ‘Dr.’ in front of my name) have little to do with it. A $70k SL65 might be doable, but what is the point? It is too fast for me to get any real use out of it on the traffic infested streets of New York and too expensive to crumble up into a ball at the track. Now maybe you make enough cash that you can afford to wreck an exotic on the track and drive it in true Top Gear style. If so, I’m pretty smart…sign me up for that 7 figure position. Short of that it is just irresponsible.
Sanman,
Congratulations on your impending medical degree… but you’re not really addressing my point. Or perhaps you are. You aren’t interested in putting yourself in a position in life to drive an exotic on-track or on that ever-arguable limit. That’s fine, but don’t assume that other people can’t or won’t.
If you think $70K is too much for a track car, then you’ve just about locked yourself out of wheel-to-wheel racing or open-tracking anything more than a Corvette. Again, that’s fine, but others may disagree.
“Now maybe you make enough cash that you can afford to wreck an exotic on the track and drive it in true Top Gear style. If so, I’m pretty smart…sign me up for that 7 figure position. Short of that it is just irresponsible.”
I don’t make seven figures but I have no qualms with driving my $60-100K cars on the track. If you hit the wall, you hit the wall. It happens. I’ve totaled one car this year already — luckily it was our racer, but over the course of the year I tracked my Phaeton, my S5, and my Boxster S.
Some people like to throw around the word “irresponsible”. Other people like to throw the phrase “craven and cowardly” around. Both of those are reductionist ways to look at a complex issue.
I’m not quite sure I understand how a 70K car is attainable, without getting a barely-affordable long term lease and focusing way too much of one’s income toward a plaything. Good luck getting any such credit in today’s market. Six figure salaries are not available to all for the taking – they are available to a group that is A. lucky, B. inheriting an elite position, or C. specialized in a business that has allowed them to make oodles of money and rise up the corporate ranks. Reduce the possibilities if you are not white or male (an unfortunate social fact, not a jab at any minorities). The playing field is not level, no matter how much we wish it was.
Jack,
I never said no one could put themself in a position in life to track an exotic. I was simply pointing out that it isn’t a possibility for the average or even above average person. The core issue is a lack of realistic vehicles being reviewed in C&D. There aren’t many that are willing to put themselves in a position to track exotics and if that is their readership they should just fold now.
Now Jack, correct me if I’m wrong, you totaled a Neon ACR at Mid Ohio (I don’t read C&D, but I do subscribe to GRM) that was not owned by you. That is very different from crashing an LP640 you own. These cars are even more expensive than a Boxster or Phaeton (20-50k used) that you tracked. There is a reason that NASA does not have an SL65 series. Realistic is Spec Focus or Spec E30.
As an aside, I checked the magazine rack today. The Vette ZR-1 in on 3 covers(R&T,C&D,Automobile) and two also have the LP640 and Viper SRT10.
Sanman111 :
“Magoo,
I have to disagree with you. Of course the corvette is more livable, but who cares. I have yet to see anyone daily drive a Lamborghini (except maybe Jeremy Clarkson). Yes you buy a Vette if you want a supercar you can buy everyday. You get the Lambo to take home the supermodel. Honestly, who cares which toy is more sensible. That like saying Matchbox cars are better than Hot Wheels because they are more realistic. If you can afford one of these, you can afford a Camry to drive to work. I think I respect Top Gear more for saying that their choices are completely unrealistic and have no basis ,but they don’t give a f*ck because supercars are about what makes you feel good.”
You misunderstand. Buy any of the cars you like. I simply said I found the CandD comparison useful and credible. If you read it objectively it can aid your decision. You needn’t arrive at the same final conclusion.
Top Gear may be entertaining to some, but it is not really about cars. It’s a “reality show,” with the same hokey premises, insipidly scripted gags, etc. I can see how the www/ritalin generation loves it but personally, I can’t make myself watch it.
Magoo,
I don’t disagree that the information in the article is useful and credible. I simply find it to be a bad comparison. In truth, I think it would have been better to have four seperate articles. Other than 600+ horsepower, I find these cars to appeal to different people with different budgets and the comparison seemed pointless. But, if you are going to compare supercars, I don’t think that price and daily driving manners are what should dictate the winner.
As for Top Gear, the show has definitely moved away from cars, but the magazine still seems to be staying on point. Either way, the reason I brought them into the debate was that they speak of these cars as toys and that is what they are. For the life of me, I can’t understand why these buff books factor in daily drivability in a supercar comparison and then forgive breakdowns in a BMW 3 series comparison that most people would use everyday. It is bass ackwards.
Well, one of the lies all car mags tell about the exotics is the planted inference that these vehicles are in any way real cars. If you want reliability and genuine build quality, you are better off hitch-hiking to the local buy here-pay here lot and throwing down $700 for the rusty Taurus wagon in the back row. Lacking a misanthropic bone in my body, I would never call any human being “Euro-trash,” but the term describes the typical exotic sports car to a T.
The main difference between a $300K exotic and a $1.5M exotic is five times as much ill-conceived, poorly validated crap that will never, ever work right.
Meanwhile, you can forget any fantasies of what one might call consumer satisfaction. Yes, the exotic dealer will indeed treat you like the pillar of the community you clearly are — while picking your pocket clean. Great for the ego, not so good for your wallet or your ultimate self-esteem.
All this goes unreported in the buff books mainly because not in their wildest dreams will journalists ever be able to afford these cars. They don’t have to live with them. They fly in, drive them, and leave. Which is about as long as anyone should have to put up with them. Just as there are ideas so gloriously and profoundly stupid that only geniuses can believe them, there are objects so useless that only rich people will buy them.