Find Reviews by Make:
17 Comments on “What’s Wrong With This Picture: Search for Toyota Camry Edition...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
The early 911s were beautiful.
Now, it appears that the BMW disease has spread to Porsche.
First of all, bullshit.
Secondly, for mainstream car mags to focus on only “exciting” models they would have to ignore the cars that 90% of their readers drive and buy. All car mags would be better served testing the boring cars more than the exciting ones, to benefit their readers.
I haven’t a clue.
I bought the initial issue of Automobile and never opened another one since (unless it was in the dr’s waiting room).
They meant no “boring” cars:
http://www.reasonablyclever.com/boots/lego/drillcar/front.jpg
I don’t think 911s have ever been beautiful. Nothing that looks even vaguely reminiscent of a Beetle could ever be beautiful in my mind
There’s nothing wrong with focusing only on exciting cars, I personally am not planning on buying a boring car for the next 10-20 years, if ever. There are plenty of magazines out there that cover boring appliances, there’s nothing wrong with one magazine choosing to focus on cars that are actually interesting.
I’ll go with superbadd75’s response: the mainstream “buff” books are like Playboy magazine…the contents are pretty to look at, but pure fantasy for most of us. And the cars they drool over are poor quality money pits.
One of the few mags to cover “boring” cars, Consumer Reports, isn’t reliable either. Boring models like the Chevy Impala are “Recommended” in one issue, and “Not Recommended” in another issue, with no explanation.
Hey, maybe if TTAC is successful enough, they could publish a print version…”Real Cars for Real People,” about the cars that people actually buy in large numbers–not Porsches, BMW M6s and Mercedes AMGs.
All car mags would be better served testing the boring cars more than the exciting ones, to benefit their readers.
This
We are now walking the line where we have auto snobs on one side and normal drivers on another. Which side are you on? It can’t be both.
They really didn’t need to use the word “only.”
I’ll go with superbadd75’s response: the mainstream “buff” books are like Playboy magazine…the contents are pretty to look at, but pure fantasy for most of us. And the cars they drool over are poor quality money pits.
That’s more accurate than you know. Just like the top-shelf adult magazines (of which playboy is one, now that it’s gone downmarket) the Internet is killing the buff-books.
I’d be more inclined to buy their “no boring cars [insert ironic exclamation point]” claim if several of their more recent issues weren’t so replete with stories about future ecomobiles from dullsville that toothpicks in the eyelids were required to keep from falling asleep while reading. As reading materials for the porcelain throne (which is what Automobile really has become) these issues were more bland than the bran that got people on the can and reading in the first place. I do generally enjoy Ezra Dyer’s contributions, though.
TTAC proves there needn’t be any boring cars. Look at all the interest a simple review of the Aveo brought.
It’s not the car, it’s the approach. I believe the approach here has been all but perfected.
All car mags would be better served testing the boring cars more than the exciting ones, to benefit their readers.
So… car mags would be better served, ultimately, not selling as many magazines, and in many cases going out of business?
Nobody buys a car mag with a Camry on the cover. The entire industry is based largely on testing relatively unobtanium cars as, generally, people who are passionate enough about cars to buy a magazine about them want to know about those things, and not so much how many miles per gallon the latest Prius gets, or how safe the latest Volvo is.
And, with the trends sure to follow the Government Motors fracas, I would expect the sentiment of “boring cars suck” to only increase.
We need more boring cars. I like cars that are safe, reliable, thrifty, and do their best to avoid catching the eye of johnny law. I think people would be happier if their car was one less thing to worry about. If I were president Obama, I’d restrict cars down to the two c’s: camry and corolla. You should be glad that I’m not the president.
“auto snobs on one side and normal drivers on another”
And a third category of drivers who view a conveyance as a possible domicile during tough times.
If I were president Obama, I’d restrict cars down to the two c’s: camry and corolla. You should be glad that I’m not the president.…
Amen to that! A car does not have to be fast, but cornering is key. The “two c’s” strike out big time on that score…It’s more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. Ugh. You sound like a retired car test for Consumer’s Union. Time to move on to the peanut butter.
Automobile is the only printed car mag I still read. I really enjoy Ezra Dyer’s work, and the magazine has done some awesome features — like the one about the greatest driver’s cars of all time or the history of speed milestones.
Nobody buys a car mag with a Camry on the cover. The entire industry is based largely on testing relatively unobtanium cars as, generally, people who are passionate enough about cars to buy a magazine about them want to know about those things, and not so much how many miles per gallon the latest Prius gets, or how safe the latest Volvo is.
And, with the trends sure to follow the Government Motors fracas, I would expect the sentiment of “boring cars suck” to only increase.
Define “boring.”
Back in the early 80’s when horsepower was choked and the engineers were doing their collective best to eek whatever excitement they could from the performance offerings, 1/4 mile and 0-60 times mattered. When the Lambo Countach broke into the 5 second 0-60 range, horsepower was exciting. When the Corvette and later the F-cars were blessed with TPI, horsepower (all 240hp) was exciting.
Every incremental increase was exciting, because the journey as well as the destination were challenging. Finding the horsepower wasn’t easy. The cars represented an achievement.
The covers shouted: Look at what we can do. And look at what it will cost you!
These days, it’s been done. Seeing yet another high dollar, mega horsepower car on the cover of a magazine, or better yet, a slew of such creations on a cover…is boring. I shrug and move on.
I’m a motorcycle guy, and I feel the same way about what I’ve seen for years with the lot of them. Sportbikes running 10’s off the floor? Cruisers with engines as large as that found in my Miata? Why?
Do we even need to ask about the relevance? I’m no safety monger, but in whose hands are such vehicles being placed? You get the typical young, dumb, full of….I’ve been there, and throw one of these bikes under him so he can feel like a man and score with the chicks, and you have a recipe for disaster. Who hasn’t been passed on the freeway by one of these Yahoos pulling an 80 mph wheelie down a 4-lane freeway?
Is that exciting enough for you? How about the neighborhood asshole who takes his Viper out on a Saturday morning, punches it, loses control and winds up spinning out on another neighbor’s lawn. While kids are out playing. Is that exciting enough? Maybe that belongs on the cover of Car & Driver.
The Bugatti has over 1000 horsepower and is available to whatever Oil Sheikh or NBA player can afford it. Is that exciting?
I dunno. I just ask the questions.
The real challenge, in case no one has noticed, is efficiency. No, efficiency won’t pull your eyeballs into your skull. No, efficiency won’t make your unit bigger. And unless she’s a tree hugger, it won’t get you laid (has a car ever truly gotten anyone laid?).
Efficiency may or may not impress the neighbor and raise your status among them. Maybe. Depends on the neighbor and the hood.
But in it’s own way, as a testament to what can or cannot be done, efficiency can be exciting. Face it, increasing efficiency is one roadblock standing in the way of humanity and a much better place. I don’t have a green agenda. I’m just stating a fact. If we increase efficiency, the environment and the economy will suffer less. We may even prosper.
So yes, to me, that’s exciting.