When Frank Williams and I launched TTAC’s news blog, we envisioned an editorial gestalt somewhere between Autoblog (dull but worthy) and Jalopnik (wild but wacky). I reckon we nailed it. We’re cranking-out far more (and timelier) hard news than Neff’s product-crazed army, and creating more pithy posts than Spinelli’s electric cool aid acid test troops. In another sense, thanks to our excellent commentators and snarky bloggers, we’ve established our own unique mindspace. Unfortunately, the feature's done sweet FA for our site stats.

Three weeks after launching the news blog and… nothing. We’re still stuck at about 13k unique visitors per day. Truth be told, TTAC’s site stats have been flatlining for longer than some dead people I know. I mean, knew. On the positive side, we’re sticky stuck; average visitor hang time has risen to an amazingly adhesive nine minutes. Monthly page views have crested a cool mil. Not to put too fine a point on it, Scotty, we need more power!

To that end, once again, still, we’re gonna make some changes’ round here. The first and most important shift: the home page layout. The current home page emphasizes reviews. That’s because we were planning to channel the 33 percent of daily visitors who find us through a search engine towards a car broker. There’s good money in that biz, it fits our branding perfectly and we figured we could bust that market wide open (sucka).

And we still do. But we’re hurting for development resources. So we need an interim plan B to raise those recalcitrant site stats and generate some ad revenues, buzz, whatever.

The simplest and easiest option: stop using big words like “recalcitrant.” Failing that (ipso facto), we’re returning the home page to the classic format. In other words, the home page's main column will once again display all items— news blog, reviews, editorials, podcasts— in sequential order.

The new/old/new format should provide an easily parsed heads-up to our search engine immigrants that TTAC is content rich. In the jargon of the biz, we’re hoping to decrease our “bounce rate,” turning e-gadflies into cyber toadstools. Or something like that.

The  “latest news” and “latest editorials” boxes will remain in the right hand column, as the list makes it easy for you (our regular customers) to stay up-to-date with the latest TTAC content. Our old friends at Redwing will add a “latest reviews” box to the right hand column. And they'll remove the TTAC Swag section, which has been less well attended (not to say patronized) than the last Snoopy and The Royal Guardsman concert. 

As for the announcement that TTAC’s “set to become a social networking site,” well, um, it isn’t. Again, the development money I glimpsed over the horizon went all mirage on me. But more than that, your comments have given me pause. With your help, I now realize that if Frank and I surrender our ability to monitor comments and ban flamers, TTAC will lose its status as an intellectual safe haven. And die.

So we’re looking into more manageable site enhancements. First out of the box: live chat. But not as it’s commonly practiced. We’ll only activate the function for pre-planned debates, discussions and webinars. Participation will be limited to responsible members of the TTAC community and invited guests.

It should be quite a lively forum. Authors, industry insiders and experts will debate ideas with colleagues, antagonists, TTAC scribes and/or regular Joes.

Meanwhile, Redwing Studios will be making a few overdue site tweaks: a contact button, the ability for subscribers to select categories for their RSS feed, a flame warning next to the comments box, etc. If there’s something that’s been niggling away at your “user experience” enjoyment for a while, now’s the time to share. And speaking of sharing…

Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve hit the wall. Until and unless I get more editorial resources, I can’t maintain my current level of creative output AND assure editorial quality AND keep insanity at bay AND be a proper husband and father. So I’m following the advice of a sage whose name Google refuses to reveal: the key to happiness is to find what it is you love to do— and not do too much of it. So, no more weekend posts for a while.

As a slave to the TTAC brand, which exists entirely in your mind, I appreciate your understanding in this. I promise to reward your patience with even better news posts, editorials, reviews and (yes) podcasts during the week. In any case, thanks for your support and patronage. I couldn’t do this important and entertaining work without you. Nor would I want to.

The Truth About Cars (TTAC) news blog started on Wednesday. By Friday, we were in trouble. That’s when I posted an item about illegal immigrants getting driver’s licenses in Maine that they could use to purchase a firearm. Some commentators cried flame bait! Others were dismayed that TTAC was wading into political waters. And a few wondered why TTAC was news blogging anyway. In response to the troll accusations, I changed the picture (from a firearm to a gun store) and toned down the text. As for the other questions, well, let’s talk.

As the Maine blog post indicates, I’m naturally drawn to news stories that raise wider social or industry issues. I especially like those stories where [I believe] the media got it wrong, or left out important facts, or presented material that provides a logical jumping-off point for spirited discussion. In case you hadn’t noticed, skewering sacred cows, challenging accepted wisdom and poking around in hidden corners is TTAC’s stock in trade.

There have been many times in the past when I’ve had to rein-in my messianic zeal. A rant about society’s defenseless in the face of car bombs didn’t make the grade. There have also been times when I’ve pulled posts off-line when the ensuing discussion dissolved into a blue state – red state brawl. My conscience, Managing Editor Frank Williams, often waggles his editorial finger. So I understand that there are– and should be– limits.

Of course, it’s simply not possible to run a website about cars with a comments section without triggering passionate socio-political not to mention moral and philosophical debate. How could we publish an editorial or news blog post on Ford’s hydrogen dreams, or CAFE standards, or GM’s union negotiations, without pissing off someone? Even if we restricted ourselves to cars, well, let’s just say the old “anti-domestic bias” issue is in no more danger of extinction than the cockroach.

So where should we draw the line? At the end of the cyber-day (which doesn’t really end), this isn’t my call to make. It’s yours. So tell me if you think the TTAC news blog should shy away from stories that raise political hackles. Keep in mind that we apply the same rigorous posting policy in all cases; so it should be “safe” to debate these issues on this site without personal attacks. Also remember that no one in these parts breakfasts on milquetoast.  

And while you’re pondering that one, what about the other end of the spectrum? I’m not sure whether or not the TTAC news blog should restrict itself to hard news. The fact that it’s called “latest news” represents my preference, but I put up a few softer pieces to see how they went down. The post on Slow Racing did no better or worse than the others, but Justin Berkowitz’ mini-rant on the new M3 stimulated the most number of views and comments.

That said, I’m not a comment whore; just because you CAN get people to post their thoughts doesn’t mean you SHOULD. Besides, I reckon Mr. Berkowitz’ post would have garnered even more attention as a full-fledged editorial or a review. Careful readers of this site will know that our authors have consistently argued that auto brands should be tightly focused and consistent. Do the softer news items violate this principle?

From a commercial perspective, we’re still aiming at picking-up some major traffic by splitting the difference between Autoblog and Jalopnik. Again, we’ve only been doing this for three days, but we’ve already gained 500 to 1000 new visitors, every day, over the entire week. That’s an encouraging sign, but another week ought to tell the tale.

But don’t let that stop you from weighing in on the broader issue of whether or not TTAC should even have a news blog. The bump could be false synchronicity, representing our Search Engine Optimization efforts. And anyway, raising site traffic is OUR problem, not yours. TTAC should be what YOU want it to be, regardless of our [necessary] commercial aspirations.

Meanwhile, an update: we’ve hit a stumbling block on the social networking side. The web guys tell me that switching TTAC onto a new platform would be an enormous, six month process. They’ve proposed an alternative: adding features to the existing WordPress platform. The first plug-in on (in?) my brain is live chat. This module can be placed globally (on the home page) and on each post. Your thoughts?

Once again, thanks for your feedback on these mission critical issues, your on-going support and continued patronage. I’m really swamped at the moment, on every level. But whenever I get disheartened, I look at the emails and comments where TTAC readers show that they understand this website’s mission and share its sardonic perspective on life. And then I get back to work.

For over two years, we’ve been telling Detroit to wake-up and smell the homily: everything either grows or dies. We’ve admonished them to adapt and evolve. This they haven’t done. The Truth About Cars (TTAC) will continue to chronicle this slow motion train wreck until the last car derails, and beyond. Meanwhile, we’d be hypocritical if we didn’t follow our own advice. The truth is: we’re not growing. So we’re about to shake things up. Again.

TTAC currently welcomes some 14k unique visitors per day. Our readers hang around for an average of four minutes, viewing an average of 2.63 pages, generating 1m page views per month. Other than a 10 percent increase in the number of new vs. “old” visitors, we’ve been generating the same stats for the last six months. Not to put too fine a point on it, we’ve flat-lined.

Our existing strategy: cater to the Google searchers by emphasizing car reviews while maintaining our base (that’s you) with a side order of editorials and comments. The current layout reflects this two-tier tactic, and we’ve been working hard to make it work.

On the newbie Googlista side, we’ve added TrueDelta’s most excellent shopping data and “stars and snarks” mini-reviews for thesaurus-challenged scanners. We’re also finishing negotiations with a car broker. When complete, the fully-independent broker (gotta maintain those brand values) will kick us back some real money– as opposed to the dribs and drabs of income provided by Google Analytics and AdTags.

On the hard core readers’ side, we’ve been posting one car review and an editorial on Monday, Wednesday and Friday; and then two editorials per day otherwise (with some exceptions). In the next couple of weeks, we’re returning to regular podcasts and entering the news blogging arena. We’ll split the difference between Autoblog’s mild-mannered and Jalopnik’s limited slip differential (LSD) approaches, and add some TTAC ‘tude and international coverage. 

While I’m delighted to offer these improvements, I realize that they’re minor tweaks to the existing recipe— which, in relative terms, is proving about as popular as chopped liver at a Hawaiian luau. Like GM, small changes to the status quo ain’t gonna cut the mustard. To survive and thrive, TTAC needs a genuine game changer: something insanely great to lift us above the competition (or at least away from it).

Unlike GM, TTAC doesn’t have 421 levels of bureaucracy and the kind of union grievance procedure that makes changing a light bulb a federal offense. So, within the bonds of decency and dollars, we’re free to reinvent ourselves. Ah, but how? 

My light bulb moment arrived via an email from an editor/writer with an enormous and well-deserved reputation in the automotive press. After praising the site, he drilled down to what made it unique: you. TTAC’s commentators’ literacy, insight and expertise blew him away.

After nursing my bruised ego, I gave his analysis some serious thought. And of course he’s right. We’re not TTAC. You are. Sure our writers’ in-yer-face prose is stimulating stuff. And yes our Draconian posting policy creates a safe haven for vigorous yet respectful debate. But your comments are what set TTAC apart from all the other automotive websites. We would be an empty shell without you.

And that means YOU are our future. So here’s what we’re going to do…

My team and I are going to turn TTAC into a social networking site. In other words, we’re going to give you a HUGE canvas upon which to paint. An ENORMOUS theme park in which to play. And it will be YOUR intellectual playground to build and explore. TTAC’s writers will still provide reviews, editorials and news. With your help, Frank and I will continue to turf out the flamers and trolls without fear or favor. But YOU will be in charge of TTAC’s destiny.

The new site will have user groups, forums, user generated blogs, live chat, webinars and webcasts, podcasts, event calendars, picture sharing, video sharing and who knows what else. Well, actually, Frank and I do. But for competitive reasons, we’re not specifying the platform or listing all the features. And anyway, it will evolve.

We’re building the foundations now. When we get closer to launch, in a month or less, I’ll invite you, our faithful subscribers, to wander around in the Beta version and claim your own piece of turf. I’ll ask you to tell us what does and doesn’t work.

TTAC will do everything in its power to make the new site the best place for automotive enthusiasts to gather on the entire World Wide Web. And keep it that way. Meanwhile, if you can give me some feedback on social networking sites you use— or hate— I’d be most appreciative.

They say the truth shall set you free. What the Hell; let’s give it a try.

Welcome to the next step in the The Truth About Cars’ evolution: TrueDelta spec and pricing data. (If you don’t see a button marked “Get Nissan SE-R Spec V Pricing” above the SE-R review, click on “Classic” in the header, and then click on “Improved” in the top right corner of the header.) From now on, visitors can use TrueDelta data to check vehicle specifications, get new car prices and make an “apples to apples” price comparison to other models. It’s part of TTAC’s ongoing commitment to provide the web’s most trustworthy automotive content.

As many of you know, Michael Karesh is the man behind TrueDelta. Today’s integration is the culmination of a longstanding relationship between Michael and TTAC. From our first contact (comments and writing), we knew that Michael shared our ethics-driven goals and attention to detail. When we decided to offer more content for the 57 percent of TTAC’s daily visitors who are “in market” car buyers, we immediately thought of TrueDelta.

Michael and the programming team have done a terrific job coordinating TrueDelta’s software with TTAC's back end. We’re still playing around with a few widget placements and stress-testing the system, but TTAC can now give Edmunds, kbb and their ilk a decent run for their money when it comes to accurate, timely and user-friendly new car pricing data.

Even as we smooth out any remaining rough edges, we’re looking to expand our services to these new car buyers, making it even easier for them to buy the right car at the right price. Meanwhile, rest assured that we will NOT be neglecting our “base:” the pistonheads who come here daily to engage in a discussion and dissection of all things automotive.

In the next few weeks, we’ll be adding a news blog. It won’t be as comprehensive as Autoblog or as funky as Jalopnik. We’ll scan the net for significant developments in automotive design, engineering, manufacturing and retail; and split the difference. We’ll help pistonheads surf the automotive gestalt without getting all knarly about it. Or something like that.

At the same time, I’ll soon be creating more podcasts. You may notice I haven’t uploaded an audio file in ages. That’s because anytime I create a TTAC podcast it automatically appears on the home page, and then the back end spits out a New Content Notification. When the programmers disenable (a.k.a. kill) that process, we’ll have a walled audio garden. Visitors who want notification of new podcasts can sign-up via TTAC or iTunes. Everyone else can carry on as normal.

And then there’s the TTAC forum, or lack thereof.

When Mr. Montgomery’s recent editorial challenged TTAC readers to debate global warming in a dignified way, you rose to the challenge magnificently. Anyone who visits this site regularly knows that our commentators are the automotive webspace’s best and brightest. While I enjoy feeding our prose to the wolves on a daily basis, it’s high time you had a larger territory to piss mark.

That said, of one thing you can be sure: we will implement our existing posting policy on all forum contributions. In other words, the intellectual playground will be vastly larger, but the anti-bullying rules will remain. TTAC does not now, nor will it ever, tolerate personal attacks on the site, its authors or fellow commentators. Persistent offenders will be permanently banned.

If you have any questions, comments or criticisms of TTAC’s TrueDelta partnership or the plans described above or anything else site-related, please leave them below. My team and I read every comment left on TTAC, and respect the intelligence, wit and wisdom of our readers. We never forget that this website couldn’t exist without your energy, enthusiasm and patronage.

OK folks, it’s been a long strange day. I want to finish it by taking this opportunity– given as it is by me to me well past the logical point of conclusion– to thank all the people who put in the hard work to make TTAC and TrueDelta happen. From our Managing Editor Frank Williams, to our new data guy Michael Karesh and his supportive wife, to our programmers, biz dev dude, writers and commentators, ALL of you have given your all for what is, let’s face it, a labor of love. Thank you.

For my part, I pledge to continue doing everything I can to put TTAC on a firm financial footing without violating our core values. I am determined that the site will remain a labor of love even after it becomes a thriving commercial enterprise. I don’t see these goals as mutually incompatible. In fact, I view their realization as a vindication of our founding principle: the truth conquers all. 

Someday you’ll boast “I read TTAC before reading TTAC was cool.” Back when the website looked like a parked URL site. When reviewers had to pretend to be new car buyers. When the TTAC’s “take no prisoners” editorial stance was diss-missed as AWAKitude (Anyone With A Keyboard). Back before the site threw auto show Bacchanalia for its loyal readers paid for by firewalled advertising, branded merchandise and TTAC Buyer’s Club car sales. Rewind to now and you’ve got some work to do. Yes, you.

First, get off your literary ass. Your comments have demonstrated your ability to kill, crush and destroy misguided, misinformed and mentally misaligned malcontents. As Rafiki would say, it is time– to move your passionate intellectual insights from our award winning comments section (if there was such a thing) onto TTAC’s editorial pages.

TTAC now publishes some ten 800-word articles per week: seven rants and three reviews. Our site stats indicate that you read most everything we publish. Don’t you know it’s karmically dangerous to snipe at our work without once putting YOUR fully-fledged ideas about the automotive industry in the cybernetic cross-hairs? Email Managing Editor frank.williams@thetruthaboutcars.com for TTAC's Writers' Guidelines.

Write a rant. Start by turning your “WTF were YOU thinking?” comment into a fully-fledged rip-post. Or write about something that’s been pissing you off since Wheels were Hot. Contrary to popular belief, there is no TTAC “party line.” Want to start a GM Recovery Journal? Game on. Think Greens are a bunch of hypocritical proto-fascists? Tell the world. Consider global warming a more dangerous threat than the Mustang GT500? Just check the topic with Frank (for duplication and libel), and then let loose the canines of conflict.

I know: you’re not a professional writer. No sweat; your passion is enough. All but a handful of our scribes are gainfully employed doing other things. Ask the guys and gals who pour their heart and soul into their work for this site: I’m a kick ass editor. If you can write something halfway decent, I’ll Hunter S. Hemingway your text until it goes from zero to apoplexy in one paragraph. And you have the right of final approval.

Next, buy some TTAC swag. Remember those stupid rock and roll T-shirts you bought, feeding the band’s cocaine habit just to prove how hip you were to total strangers? Well it’s time feed our writers’ beer budget just to prove how hip you are to total strangers. The TTAC logo may look a bit like a prison tat, but the motto kicks ass. Show me another license plate frame that flaunts your knowledge of a dead language (hint: “the truth conquers all”), refers people to a way cool website and doesn’t advertise some skanky car dealer.

TTAC T’s are excellent quality and so not gaudy. The TTAC mug tells the world you’re no mug. The mouse pad asks the rats what they’re made of. Yes it’s expensive stuff. But TTAC can’t lose on the deal (no inventory costs), we make a few bucks per purchase and you’re not that pimply-faced teenager who depended on his/her parent’s largesse to make a bold counter-cultural statement. And if you can think of another deeply desirable item we should be selling, share it with the group below. (Check back on our selection from time to time.) 

Speaking of sharing with the group, you’re an automotive alpha. Friends, family, co-workers and bored strangers on flanking bar stools depend on you for car buying advice. Eventually, we’ll have all the info they need to buy a car. Eventually, you can hook them up with an independent car broker through the TTAC Buyer’s Club. Meanwhile, email a link.

In fact, anytime you read something on TTAC that makes you eject coffee out your nose, email the TTAC link. By the same token, anytime you read a review or rant that makes you wonder what ignorant mind could assemble such fetid tripe, email the TTAC link. And anytime you leave your cubicle to go to the can, come back and email a TTAC link.

In the last five years, TTAC’s explored strange new viewpoints. We’ve sought out controversial ideas and sacrificed sacred cows. We’ve boldly gone where Edmunds, Car and Driver and The Detroit News have never gone before. Now it’s your turn. Write for us. Buy from us. And tell the world that TTAC is here. Tell them we’re hungry for the truth.

The bard said small curs may not be regarded when they grin; but great men tremble when the lion roars. I say I'd rather face a single lion than a really determined pack of curs. Anyway, you do your part to increase our ferocity and we’ll do ours. Fair enough?

The Truth About Cars (TTAC) has consistently criticized domestic automakers for some pretty basic mistakes: lack of focus, glacial product cycles, bland design and poor customer communications. I would be a hypocrite if I didn’t admit that this website suffers from these problems. But it is my full intention to address ALL of these challenges, so that we can keep faith with our basic brand promise. So, here’s where we’ve screwed-up and here’s what we’re going to do about it. Provided, that is, you agree.

I realize that the remains a major disconnect between TTAC’s new “parked url” look (ouch!) and our previous Zen rock garden gestalt. Not to mention the functionality issues plaguing the comment’s box and other areas. When I asked for your feedback on the new site design, you bloody well gave it. I immediately saw the error of my ways and promised to sort it all out.

After securing new funding, I’ve purchased www.ttac.com (active now) and re-hired the people who designed the original website. Starting next week, Redwing Studio will begin returning TTAC to its minimalist look and feel, and restoring lost functionality.

We’re not talking about a retro mod. We’re moving forward, in a new direction. And it’s important that you understand where we’re headed.

Since its inception, TTAC has provided readers with 800-word reviews and editorials. The mix has attracted a passionate, literate and engaged audience– as you’d expect for a no-holds-barred automotive website whose writing style requires high school or better reading comprehension.

While I’m proud of our literary output and fierce editorial independence, commercial reality demands that we must shift our focus to a more populist perspective. In other words, TTAC is set to become a car shopping site. Well, not entirely.

Here’s the idea.

TTAC will have two home pages. The first will be the “public” page (i.e. the one newbies land on). Home page one will have a proper review, author and keyword search function. It will also display ten review excerpts and the usual link to the full review (“more”). The blurbettes will include star ratings, and links to model specifications, pricing, comparisons and a car brokerage service. The column currently occupied by editorials will [eventually] be filled with ads and shopping-related links.

In short, TTAC’s new home page will offer a one-stop shop for consumers looking to research, compare and buy a car, using truly independent advice. Think of it as Consumer Reports with attitude. What’s more, we will stay in touch with “our” shoppers to assure a proper quality service and cater to their ongoing needs.

There will also be a second home page for you, our faithful, hardcore audience. “TTAC classic” will return to the “old” format of reviews and editorials stacked in strict chronological order.

Rest assured, the content itself will not change. The editorials will continue apace. They’ll be just as feisty and high-brow as ever. But the split will allow us to create a [let’s face it] less intellectual and more highly focused revenue-generating TTAC for a large number of car shoppers. Given our financial situation, this consumer service is critical to our continued editorial independence.

Needless to say, this new focus will take TTAC into uncharted waters. But my father taught me that business isn’t risky. People are risky. Well, some are and some aren’t.

The writers, editors, financiers, programmers and readers of this website are the most steadfast people I’ve ever met. To a man (and woman), they believe that telling the truth about cars is an inherently virtuous pursuit. They know that their work elevates the souls of those it touches– even if the truth hurts. They understand that those who have a vested interest in falsehood, half-truths and misdirection actively oppose our efforts. 

I believe in the people who make TTAC possible. And I believe that there’s nothing wrong with taking our mission into the mainstream. As long as we tell the truth to the only people who really matter– the people who buy, use and (hopefully) love cars– we will be rewarded with their trust and patronage. 

Now it’s your turn. Tell us where TTAC’s gone wrong– and may be about to go wrong. Tell us where TTAC’s gone right– and how we can capitalize on our strengths. Should we start reviewing used cars? Do we need better car photographs? Should we drop editorials entirely? Is there a killer ap we could bring to car shopping? Feel free to comment on any aspect of the site’s past, present or future.

After all, you are TTAC’s “300:” the automotive alphas whose ongoing support defend and protect us from those who would ignore us, co-opt us, or happily watch us disappear into the ether. Once again, we need your help.

As you’ve no doubt noticed, things they are a-changin’ on The Truth About Cars. Our new look is evolving, several new writers have made the scene and a whole lot of new readers/commentators are joining us every day. With all that going on we thought we’d better answer a few of the questions we’ve been getting (and throw in a few more we just made up). 

What is The Truth About Cars?

The Truth About Cars provides no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners automotive reviews and industry-related editorials. Our writers call it like they see it, and pull no punches. We also provide a comments section for readers to voice their informed and passionate opinions in a atmosphere of mutual respect.

How did the site get its start?

About four years ago, Robert Farago was a freelance writer living in the UK. After Autocar blacklisted Farago for slating then Editor-In-Chief Steve Sutcliffe (for boasting about driving a Lamborghini with his eyes closed), Farago started posting rants on www.pistonheads.com. Despite (or because of) Fahrenheit 451 temp replies, he created a regular series called "The Truth About Cars." When Farago moved to the U.S., he started TTAC.

How are you different from other automotive sites?

The Truth About Cars prides itself on its editorial independence. Even though we accept advertising, the ads do not influence our editorial content. We also believe in full disclosure. Any time we receive a car loan or travel considerations from a manufacturer, we state the fact in the review.

What is going on with the web site?  Why does it look so… uh… plain?

As they say in the construction business, pardon our appearance. We’re making improvements to the site; many of which were suggested last Sunday (we haven’t forgotten). Due to budgetary constraints, the changes are incremental. Rest assured, Farago's OCD guarantees that TTAC will return to its Zen garden aesthetic– cleaner, sharper and brighter– once the remodeling is done. Meanwhile, thank you for your patience and understanding.

Why haven’t you reviewed a _________?

TTAC’s a small but feisty site. As far as access to manufacturers' press fleets is concerned, that's a lethal combination. Our poorly-paid, single-minded reviewers must beg, borrow and go to dealerships to drive a car. Mind you, there are advantages: we tend to drive the same car you can buy, rather than carefully prepared press cars NB: If you're a TTAC supportive manufacturer, dealer or owner who would be willing to provide a TTAC scribe with a test drive of something new we haven't reviewed yet (we're nationwide), please contact us ASAP.

I can’t see the comment I just entered.  What happened?

Normally, when you enter a comment it’ll show up as soon as you submit it. If your comment contains certain flagged words or several web links or comes from a questionable-looking domain or looks like comment spam (we've received thousands of them), the WordPress spam filter may trap your comment. And there it sits, waiting for manual approval. If there’s a legitimate comment in there we’ll rescue it (and edit it if necessary) before we delete the real spam. Meanwhile, patience.

Why can’t I enter a comment? 

To enter a comment you have to be registered on the site, and signed in.

What's TTAC's comments policy?

TTAC has a strict policy for posting comments:

1. No flaming the website, its authors or fellow commentators  "Flaming" means personally insulting. For example, you are free to suggest that a TTAC editorial should consider Toyota's green policies, but you are NOT free to say "we've got it in" for domestic automakers (or anyone else). You are free to argue that a reviewer should take the new Jeep Patriot off-road, but you are NOT free to call the writer biased or unfair. You are free to say Ford makes reliable vehicles, but you are NOT free to question a commentator's right to recount his personal history of unreliable Fords.  

2. No trolling "Trolling" means making comments deliberately designed to encourage flamers. For example, you are free to suggest that TTAC should consider Toyota's green policies, bit you are NOT free to say "Toyota's a bunch of lying scumbags." You are free to argue that a reviewer should take the Patriot off-road, but you are not free to say "anyone who doesn't take a Jeep off-road is a wimp." You are free to say Ford makes reliable vehicles, but you are not free to say "people who don't love Fords are lousy drivers."

Any commentator who flames or trolls receives email notification that the comment was edited or deleted. If the comment is deemed excessively offensive or mean spirited, the commentator also receives a warning. After the second offense, the commentator will be banned from posting on the site. Permanently. I repeat: there is no coming back. Ever.

If you encounter an offensive comment, do not respond in the comments section. Send an email to Robert Farago or Frank Williams and we’ll take care of it. 

And one more thing. There can be a fine line between passionate commentary and flaming/trolling. If you have any doubts, err on the side of civility. Or write an editorial.

How can I try my hand at writing for TTAC?

Email us for a copy of TTAC’s Writers’ Guide. It’ll give you the proper format and procedure for submitting articles or reviews.

What’s coming down the pike?

Once the site redesign is complete, we’ll have a lot of new features. Old time readers will remember the ratings and stars for each review; these are coming back. We also hope to have links to specifications and pricing data on the cars reviewed. And we’re in negotiations with a purchasing service to get the best deal possible for our readers who are in the market for a new vehicle. Through all of it, we will continue to provide the finest fully independent automotive journalism on the web.

Frank Williams

Managing Editor 

OK, here it is. And it's already evolving. Our web gurus, Mark Madden and Kyle Morton, are on the case. The font size will grow. They're going to decrease the column width within the Review pages. The search box will be restricted to selecting makes (the current search engine is basically worthless). The stats and stars arrive next week. There will be lots of tweaks in the days ahead. Now, before you let rip, try to keep in mind our goal: to make the site user-friendly for mainstream car buyers while maintaining our full editorial and review mojo for the faithful. OK, the floor is yours.

In the Brave New World of electronic automotive journalism, The Truth About Cars (TTAC) squares up against some heavy hitters: KBB, Edmunds, MSN Autos and more. Separately and together, the industry leaders generate more page views than Senator Mark Foley– and us. In truth, there’s an exponential gap between their site traffic and ours. To take on these giants, to pay our writers real money, TTAC must change. Yes, we’ve broken our advertising cherry. But we need to break out of our e-ghetto. So here’s the plan.

As you know, TTAC’s editorials kick ass. Literally. But as much as I enjoy writing, editing and reading our no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners rants, as much I value your witty, passionate and knowledgeable responses, I’ve decided that TTAC’s commercial future lies elsewhere.

Quite simply, we need more of the masses to make money, and the numbers tell the tale: the masses aren’t interested in the arcane debates that float our boat. While I’m not going to deep-six or dumb-down our rants, it’s time for TTAC to re-focus our energies on our most accessible product: car reviews.

Again, rest assured that TTAC will continue to provide a steady stream of honest, literate and provocative editorials. But we’re turning this website into more of a car search widget. In other words, we’re looking to capture more of the people looking for the truth about cars they may want to purchase.

Even as we are now, TTAC gets a LOT of model searches through our Google rankings (enter the model name of a car we’ve reviewed and we’re usually on the first page or so). Once browsers click onto a review, it’s like they landed in a Swedish minimalist buff book. They don’t know what’s where, what’s what, what we’re on about and what to do next. And once they’ve got the gist, they leave.

To cater to and attract newbies, to keep their attention and profit from their interest, we’re building a new home page. It will contain one or two reviews and a simple, clear search function (for car reviews). The reviews will remain pithy, but become more user friendly. Initially, we’ll bring back the stats and stars, and add a “Why You Should Buy This Car” and a “Why You Shouldn’t Buy This Car” feature (which I designed for Jalopnik).

Eventually, we’ll add [truly] original photography and video, some way cool widgets and lots of helpful, unbiased shopping information (price comparisons, dealer recommendations, etc.).  

Meanwhile, on the new home page, editorials will be accessible through title-only links to the Editorials home page. This [Swedish minimalist] navigation assumes that you, our faithful panel of engaged experts, will be able to find your new old home without delay. And again, once there, our talented writers will carry on carping in their own inimitable fashion.

So that I can devote more time and energy to developing the review side of the website, I’m appointing Frank Williams TTAC’s Editorials Editor. Working in the Department of Redundancy Department, Frank will write, commission and schedule our rants. He’ll monitor your replies and snuff out flamers. I’ll still write, but Frank will call the shots.

The basic thinking behind this review-o-centric strategy: focus. I’ve chided automakers for years for not rigidly defining their niche, staying within its confines and maintaining the long-term effort success demands. By making The Truth About Cars the world’s best car review site, I’ll be following my own advice.     

Meanwhile, before, during and after our re-launch, I’d like your feedback. In this, the pre-launch phase, I need to know if you think there’s room on the web for a truly independent car review site. I’d also like to hear what functions and features you think we should add to the review mix: comparos, price comparisons, dealer locator, buyer’s club, recommended rides, etc. What should we do that “they” do? How can we innovate? 

As always, TTAC lives or dies based on its ability to cater to your needs. We’ve tried tap-dancing for a living, and done well enough. But doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. It’s time for TTAC to get out of the entertainment business, into mainstream infotainment. Oh, and we're also building a MAJOR community site for launch next month (TTAC subs will get a Beta version invite.)

In any case, you have my word that TTAC will never lose its spirit or editorial independence. As the writers and I adjust to this transition, we draw strength from your past support, and inspiration from your suggestions. I will never forget that you gave me the chance to follow my heart’s desire, to work with like-minded individuals to build something fundamentally worthwhile. Thank you for your support.

When we added a comments section to The Truth About Cars, I was determined that TTAC would not become what Jalopnik’s Mike Spinelli called “a picnic over a cesspool.” To that end, TTAC instituted a zero tolerance policy towards comments that flame/insult the website, its authors or fellow commentators. I’ve sent dozens of emails to offenders, explaining why their comment(s) were edited or deleted. I’ve also permanently banned seventeen subscribers from posting. I believe this policy has been a success. But I want to give you a chance to publicly vent your feelings on our editorial policies without fear of retribution. And here it is.

Given our “death/suicide watch” coverage, it’s no surprise that some readers continue to believe TTAC is biased against The Big Two Point Five. Some feel so strongly they consider us anti-American. First, I would remind these critics that the site contains both positive reviews of domestic product (Fusion, Navigator, GT500, Corvette, SSR, Outlook, etc.) and negative reviews of transplant vehicles (Tribeca, M5, Cayenne Turbo S, etc.). Second, criticizing American companies is not un-American— especially when you’re trying to alert these organizations to the dangers they face. If you beg to differ, well, differ away.

Meanwhile, anyone who wants to forward a more positive perspective on Detroit’s fortunes is invited to submit one or more 800-word editorials justifying their optimism. We’d also welcome any writer willing to chronicle the triumphs and tragedies of foreign or transplanted automakers (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mercedes, BMW, etc.). In any case, rest assured that TTAC’s always open to editorials on any automotive subject, including opposing viewpoints. And, in our defense, our Detroit-centric coverage reflects limited resources rather than ambitions.

TTAC also stands accused of hypocrisy. Specifically, my editorial calling Bob Lutz an idiot had many wondering why I felt free to make such an undignified statement when they’re prohibited from making similar remarks about the site, its authors of other commentators. At the risk of making an invidious distinction, TTAC’s zero tolerance anti-flaming regs do NOT apply to the editorials themselves. Our essayists’ job: stimulate vigorous debate. If I/they must use hyperbole and deliberately provocative prose to achieve these goals, by God I/they will. If this double standard rankles, well, now’s the time to say so.

I’d also like to know if we’ve got our editorial mix right. Generally speaking, TTAC’s publishing a single piece per day, alternating between rants and reviews. I experimented for a bit, running my Jalopnik precasts in addition to the normal editorial posts. Would you like these audio features back again? What about QOTW (Question of the Week)? While we’re at it, should TTAC resurrect the “as read by” audio on the editorials and reviews? Do you want to see accompanying video, or are we best off sticking with writing?

Those are my concerns. But I don’t want to frame this debate. Let slip the dogs of war. Don’t hold back. Tell us what we’re doing wrong or, if you’re feeling charitable, what we’re doing right. No holds barred. No limits, save [a bit of] linguistic decency. And one more thing. Don’t think I get a thrill out of banning people from commenting here. As you might have guessed, I may not share these miscreants' opinions, but I share their passion, frustration and anger. Clearly, they don’t understand or appreciate the boundaries of civilized discourse. But it's equally obvious that they have strong beliefs. For that, and nothing else, I admire them. 

A blogger recently concluded that The Truth About Cars (TTAC) is the exact opposite of traditional blog. Our posts offer crazed and demented commentary– which our readers counter with careful and well-reasoned analysis. Yes, well, TTAC is certainly home to the most intelligent and engaged readership in the biz. I am constantly astounded by our readers’ wisdom, passion and insight. While TTAC is dwarfed by the mainstream automotive media, this is the place where crucial ideas are stress tested by an informed audience. I can not thank you enough for your contribution to TTAC’s editorial development. Now click on the damn Michelin ad. And listen up: we need your help.

Again, please click on the Michelin ad. As our first honest-to-God dedicated advertiser, they deserve your support. TTAC’s portion of the tire maker’s new media budget will help keep us both free (i.e. alive) and independent (i.e. snarky). If you support our mission of motojournalistic mayhem, please get into the habit of patronizing our patrons.

Second, it’s time to spread the TTAC gospel. Everything either grows or dies. Unlike your local municipal conurbation, we need additional traffic. If you could email your best buds a url of a rant or review that strikes (if not wounds) your fancy, the resulting intellectual virus will help secure the readership we need to become a larger and more important force in automotive journalism. To that end, I present the following two paragraphs for your cutting and pasting pleasure:

Yo dog! How’s it hanging? I’m emailing you because this whack job webhead asked me to cut, paste and send this paragraph so you’d click on www.thetruthaboutcars.com and drive up the site’s traffic– so he can score some ad bucks and hit up Porsche for a press car. You probably knew it was something weird like that because A) what do I care about some other guy driving a Porsche and B) you know I’d never call you “dog” or enquire about the health of your testicles.

Anyway, the site’s excellent. And yes, this is still cut and paste, so you can’t trust a word you’re reading. But trust me; The Truth About Cars is well worth a visit. It’s got no-holds-barred automotive rants and reviews, updated every damn day. The articles are only 800 words, so it’s a quick fix. And the writing’s funny enough that I have ejected coffee through my nose on at least one occasion. So do me a favor and click on www.thetruthaboutcars.com . By the way, you know that thing I borrowed a while back? I lost it. 

Thirdly, I need your help patrolling the comments section. Initially, all I ask is that you refrain from engaging flamers and trolls. Attacking misguided malcontents only encourages them. If you spot a comment that’s deliberately inflammatory towards the site, a writer or another commentator (e.g. a comment that accuses a writer of a personal prejudice against a domestic automaker’s products), please email me immediately at robert.farago@thetruthaboutcars.com. I’m ready, willing and able to delete offensive posts and ban persistent offenders. Have done. Will do.

And lastly, I’d like you to have a merry Christmas and/or a Happy Hanukkah. In the New Year, TTAC will launch a new site design and a couple of exciting (profitable?) commercial enterprises. We’ll give you a heads-up when our plans take shape, so you can help us avoid ye olde self petard hoisting deal. (Again.) Meanwhile, make sure you take some time this holiday season to want what you already have. Working together, we've built a vibrant, thriving community of automotive enthusiasts who aren’t afraid to hear– and tell– the truth. Professionally, that's all I ever wanted. Thank you. 

The Truth About Cars (TTAC) TWAT Award Selection Committee has convened. Fifteen members of our cadre of car critics and commentators carefully considered the full horror of your 131 nominations. They then selected 20 vehicles that deserve your consideration for the final 10 winners/losers. And so, now, we turn to you, our avid devotees and unshakeable critics, for your knowledge, passion, honesty and sarcasm. It’s time to VOTE for the ten vehicles which will be anointed TTAC’s top TWATs for 2006.

As you may have noticed during the nomination process, some vehicles practically dripped with TWAT-iness, bobbing to the top of the toilet bowl and staying there for the duration. Many of these execrable rides made it all the way to the top 20. Others kept a fairly low profile, but were decreed fully TWAT-worthy by my esteemed colleagues. The list of finalists shows that bad taste, poor design and questionable construction know no price, market segment or country of origin. So without further ado, here are the 20 finalists, listed in alphabetical order:

Buick Rendezvous

Cadillac Escalade

Chevrolet Aveo

Chevrolet Cobalt / Pontiac G5 / Saturn Ion

Chevrolet Impala

Chevrolet Monte Carlo

Chrysler Aspen

Chysler Crossfire

Ford Ranger / Mazda B-series

GM Minivans

Hummer H2

Infiniti QX56

Jaguar X-type

Jeep Commander

Jeep Compass

Lincoln Mark LT

Lincoln Navigator

Saab 9-7x

Subaru B9 Tribeca

Subaru Baja 

Selecting 10 of these worst of all possible vehicles from such an undistinguished list will be tough. How do you decide which cars are the crème de la crap? To help you separate the chaff from the toxic waste, here are some factors to consider when voting. [Fair Disclosure: we’re providing this guide simply to give the award gravitas amongst any media spies who may be monitoring our efforts.]

Market segment suitability/competitiveness  Is it a badly badge-engineered bodge born to placate greedy, boneheaded dealers looking to sell something, anything in a particular market? Does it live up to the claims of the marketing goons? (Then again, can anything?) Is there any justification whatsoever for its existence?

Reliability/Safety  Has it been recalled more times than a favorite fairy tale? Does it have a reputation (anecdotal or statistical) for dying (perhaps of shame)? Would you put your loved ones in one of them for a cross-country trip, assuming you're not planning on collecting on the insurance?

Build quality  How does the overall quality of construction, fit and finish compare with other vehicles in the same price class/market segment or, say, a Walmart sofa? Does the vehicle rattle, thrum, drum and hum so much you could dance the conga to its beat?

Quality of materials  How do the materials used compare with other vehicles in the same price class or, say, a K-Mart suit? How well do the controls work? Is there obvious cost-cutting everywhere you look or touch? Can you look or touch it without puking?

Styling  When you look at the vehicle, do you feel yourself slowly turning to stone? Could it be a useful tool for interrogators at Guantanamo Bay?

Performance/handling  How well do the acceleration, handling, fuel economy, and drivability compare to other vehicles in the same price class/market segment or, say, one of those rolling tables teachers use for overhead projectors?  

Design  How well does the vehicle’s overall design (interior, ergonomics, exterior styling, space utilization, visibility) work? Is it an exercise in wretched excess or a paean to bad taste? Is it a modern design or does it hearken back to ye olde days of crapteryear?

Desirability  How would you feel about owning this vehicle? Would you rather walk/watch The Wiggles than be seen behind the wheel? If a rental agent handed you the keys, would you consider it an insult?

Je ne sais quoi  Does the vehicle have that certain “something” that makes you throw up in your mouth a little when you see one drive by? Should it be sent to the crusher on general principles?  

Yada, yada, yada. It’s time to vote for your TWAT. Click here and you’ll link through to the polling site. Again, vote for ten choices from the list. Once you’ve made your choices, you’ll be magically returned to the TTAC home page. Obviously, your votes will be held in the strictest confidence and tabulated with mindless electronic impartiality. You are, of course, invited to list your choices below with a short explanation of your decision making process.

The poll will be online through next Wednesday evening. We’ll announce the winners (losers?) on Monday. Thanks you for your help in this important experiment in journalistic freedom and, let’s face it, payback.

Why do we come here? Why do we visit this site weekly, daily, hourly, or every couple of minutes when we can spare the time? I began to consider this question in the wee hours this morning, not at all displeased to be trading valuable sleep time for an issue with absolutely no life relevance.

I began by reviewing the history of my own automotive hysteria. My parents told me I could identify any car on the road by age five. I never missed a trip with my dad to fill up his car, just so I could enjoy a whiff of that automotive elixir’s bouquet. Maybe we needed an oil change, so I could watch the guys lift the car and do their greasy-handed labor of love. Maybe I’d get to sit on dad’s lap and steer on the way home.

These experiences aren’t unique in American culture, but they’re part of a lost automotive acculturation process. Vapor grabbing nozzles have sucked away a bouquet we now call toxic. Try and place your kid on your lap while driving and see what happens (just ask Britney). And sorry, insurance regulations don’t allow kids near a mechanical lift.

My automotive obsession was formed in another time, in ancient, unforgettable crucibles: a 1953 Olds 88, 1959 Chevy Brookwood, 1963 Chevy Impala, 1963 Olds F-85, 1964 Cadillac Sedan DeVille, 1972 Chevy Impala and then… the punch line. A 1972 Chevy Vega. We dubbed this mistake the “Vaguely,” due to its inability to maintain consistent forward progress. One trip to Yosemite clocked in at four MPG while the car happily chewed up its distributor seal. A Datsun replaced its not-so-cherished spot in the driveway.

You can insert your own automotive childhood here. I suspect many of you will have experienced similar exposure to what was good and bad about domestic and imported automobiles. I bet the memories left you with a deep sense of truth, justice and the American iron.

It’s true. We know what was right with our childhood mounts, and we’d like to have that back in our cars’ DNA, thank you very much. The Truth About Cars’ Death Watches pay tribute to our pilgrimages to the altar of resurrection. Whether we’re positively or negatively charged, we watch the steady downhill trudge of an American industry which transported us from diapers to backseat shenanigans at the drive-in. We hope they get it. We know what’s at stake, we see their cards and we can call their bluff.

We would love to know that Dr. Z and Rabid Rick inhale this website’s literary emissions right along with us. We pray that Billy told Alan, “Dude, if you want to know what pistonheads want to see behind the blue oval, check out TTAC. Just pour yourself a stiff drink first. And make sure only the janitorial staff is around to hear you scream.”

This is the place where we get to imagine ourselves in the driver’s seat and say grandly and loudly, “Well, if I were in charge” on every issue. We imagine green lighting or killing products and/or entire brands. We put our convictions right out there for the whole world to see, whether we’re writing a review or editorial or reacting to it. We trash what needs to be trashed and praise what gets our driving mojo working. Everyone with a belly button has an opinion, and we’ll take what you got right here.

Yes, well, truth of the matter notwithstanding, we are not now nor are we ever likely to have a snowball’s chance in Hades of ever being placed in charge of anything grander than our own homestead (or business), and probably for good reason. It’s highly probable that the people reading this had “does not play well with others” or equivalent marked on their early report cards.

But we are kings of our own private automotive domains. Individually, we impact our neighbors, colleagues, friends and loved ones. They turn to us for guidance. They seek us out for our passion, insight and expertise. They listen to us, sometimes with amusement, occasionally with barely hidden condescension. However tentative, their trust obliges us to know what’s out there, what does and doesn’t make a good choice, from the shabby sheds crowding plastic flagged used car lots to the gleaming offerings swimming in the local dealer’s fishbowl.

So, we come back– right here– to discover, uncover, chew apart and rehash. We argue and display our knowledge and weaknesses for our peers to support or dismiss. This is the uniquely, quirky, always interesting watering hole for those whose minds run on hydrocarbons, a tavern dispensing 5W-30, natural or synthetic. And the words that we leave here are a testament to the bright spark of our existence, that say “we came, we drove, we lived.”

The flame wars regarding “imports” versus "domestics" have reached Fahrenheit 451. Ironically enough, I’ve doused those fires by banning “any comments that attempt to impugn this site's authors or its commentators for an anti-domestic car bias.” And I mean it. To those who would malign this website on that basis, I state for the record that TTAC writers apply their critical facilities without fear or favor, regardless of a manufacturer’s national origin. Although I haven’t asked my scribes to take a loyalty oath, I’m sure they love their country. What they don’t love is crap cars.

News flash: the publisher of this site, the author of the GM Death Watch, would like to see The General build an affordable sedan that kicks the snot out of the so-called imports. Why? I’m a pistonhead. I’d like to drive that car, and it would force other automakers to raise their game. I’m well aware that The Big Two Point Five’s supporters will perceive this statement as weak and irrelevant: a personal failure to place our nation’s best interests above personal passion. They believe that car journalists ignore the “fact” that promoting “foreign” cars endangers their fellow Americans’ economic well-being. They consider us the import-loving enemy within.

Back in the 70’s, when the import invasion was just that– an invasion of foreign-made cars by foreign-owned manufacturers– this argument carried some weight. But not much. If ever an industry needed a wake-up call, it was the U.S. automotive market. By and large, in general and in specific, The Big Three’s cars were crap. Now I’m not going to tender my exact definition of “crap.” Suffice it to say, many of the imports were better built, better handling, more fuel efficient and cheaper than their American competition. Equally important, the journalists who pointed-out the imports’ relative excellence were not responsible for their arrival, or the domestics’ abject failure to rise to the challenge.

Today, the “buy American” argument is totally without merit. A number of TTAC articles have noted the imports’ American design and manufacturing presence relative to The Big Two Point Five’s outsourcing. When GM, Ford and DCX build and import foreign-made cars and slot an ever-increasing number of Chinese parts into their vehicles, their supporters have no right to drape themselves in the American flag. They also have no right to label critics of GM, Ford and DCX products unwitting opponents of the American working class, when the companies themselves show no compunction about selling foreign-made products to their American customers.

Nor are The Big Two Point Five's Supporters on solid ground when they suggest that TTAC’s car critics have been so blinded by their love of “foreign cars” they can’t see that GM, Ford and DCX have caught-up with the competition. My writers know their way around cars. They know what makes an interior a pleasure palace or a penalty box. They understand the subtle differences between engines, transmissions, suspensions, brakes and steering. They are not in the thrall of European dynamics or style; they can appreciate a big, brash comfy cruiser as much as a gorgeous, sharp-handling sports car– regardless of the vehicle's country of origin. If a TTAC writer says a Ford product is two model cycles behind a comparable Toyota, it’s the truth– to the best of that writer’s knowledge and critical abilities.

The pro-Detroit flamers last refuge is reliability; I’m well and truly fed up with arguments on this score. Supposedly, the gains made by The Big Two Point Five’s products in the most popular reliability studies prove that their cars are now as good as anyone else’s (no matter what anyone says to the contrary).  In fact, the closerthanthis results listed by these studies simply show that the battleground over automotive excellence has shifted. It’s no longer good enough for a car’s suspension not to break; it has to deliver superlative ride quality. A long-lasting engine isn’t a major advantage; it’s got to be smooth, powerful and fuel efficient. The real competition now surrounds perceived quality and, lest we forget, dealer service. I don't consider it biased to suggest that The Big Two Point Five have a long way to go in these areas.

In short, TTAC is an equal opportunity website. Do I really need to cite all the positive reviews this website has given The Big Two Point Five's products, or the negative reviews afforded imported cars? Tallying-up the hosannas and Bronx cheers within those two categories would reveal nothing but an invidious distinction. The cars and their manufacturers get what they deserve. Nothing more, nothing less.

So here’s the deal. If you want to hash out this issue, do it right here, right now. Get it out of your system. Do American cars suck, or are journos giving them a bum rap? You be the judge, jury and… executioner. But once you’ve had your say, you’re done. If you disagree with a reviewer over his or her assessments of a car, feel free to let rip. But I will NOT tolerate knee-jerk xenophobic attacks. All such comments will be deleted. Their authors will be banned. That is all.

First off, I’d like to ask you a favor. Could you please take a couple of minutes and fill out this survey? The suits at FM Publishing want to hook potential Truth About Cars (TTAC) advertisers on the quality of our readership. As you are all Harvard MBA’s earning seven figure salaries ready to buy whatever high-priced goods we tout, FM should have no problem landing a major sponsorship deal with BMW (you know, aside from the whole flying vagina thing). No really; do what we do: tell the truth. Much obliged. Now, to my main point: should TTAC post once or twice a day, or more?

Last night, TTAC contributor Stephan Wilkinson returned from a somnambulistic sojourn at the Pebble Beach Concours D’Elegance. He fired up his Mac and discovered a large pile of our New Content Notification emails sitting on his e-mat. Wilkinson was not pleased. STOP CRANKING OUT SO MUCH MATERIAL! Wilkinson wrote that TTAC’s twice daily editorial output threatens to overwhelm readers with automotive information.

There’s evidence to support Wilkinson’s “no mas” position. Every time I put up a new post, at least fifteen subscribers unsub. The dearly departed who reply to my “Oops” email report that they’re drowning in TTAC emails (which renders my email a heavily ironic gesture). I’ve responded to these protests by A) shutting off the New Content Notification System as of today and B) commissioning Redwing Studios to create a program that will allow subscribers to limit/eliminate their New Content Notification emails. But the central point remains: two 800-word posts a day had dozens of subscribers hanging up the cybernetic do not disturb sign.

Is less be more? Would you be happier with just one post per day? As a jobbing journalist used to cramming prose into the infobeast like a French farmer preparing a duck’s liver for foie gras, the idea of cutting back on content scares me witless. In fact, I’m so freaked by the prospect I’m reluctant to try an experimental literary liposuction. But I can certainly see the advantages of streamlining our operations, for both of us.

Posting once a day would liberate editorial time/money we could use to improve each article. We could pay our writers more (maintaining their loyalty). We could afford our own review photographs and, perhaps, add video. We could bring back the stats and stars, in an expanded form (similar to the system I designed for Jalopnik). It would give me more time to commission, think and hone. And once-a-day frequency would give our highly intelligent, worldly and literate readers a full 24 hours to hash out the issues raised by each post. On the other hand…

I want TTAC to kick ass. Providing you’re not a triskaidekaphobe, click on “editorials” button at the top menu bar. I’ve split the content into 13 sections. In an ideal world, I’d have reporters for each of these beats. Even if we Zen down to once post per day, the math doesn’t quite ad up: lots of writers, lots of stories, seven posts. In other words, if TTAC published once-a-day, critical stories could get left behind.

Of course, that’s not your problem per se. TTAC’s strives to provide the highest quality automotive writing we can, in a form and frequency that suits you. So, again, I put it to you, the life and soul of this website. How often would you like TTAC to publish new material? Assume that the NCN email problem is solved and that maintaining our current pace (or more) would not require sacrificing quality. Meanwhile and in any case, thank you for your patience, consideration and support.