|
I suppose the only way (without certain manufacturers refusing to lend [for free] their cars to magazines/TV shows/websites for review) to get a really honest review is for either all the new models to be bought by the magazines/TV shows/websites (unrealistic due to the cost) or having enough advertising revenues to pay for the hire for short-ish (and some longer term ones) periods to allow a reasonably comprehensive review (including later follow-ups to see how the models are faring after a year or two on the market [defects/problems, etc]).
In the current climate, the second one looks to be the better alternative, though as we regularly here on this website, the line between a viable website-based business and going under is quite fine. I trust far more the opinions of fellow Backroomers whom I am familiar with/know they are not 'plants' from manufacturers than paid-for journos in general, though HJ appears to be in the minority of journos who actually can be trusted and well deserves his industry name.
Why some 'newapapers' even bother with motoring reviews I don't know - 90%+ of reviews are in the 4/5 category, with some makes being given 'deity' like status (VAG, Ford, JLR, BMW, Aston Martin) in their reviews. Even some patently 'carp' cars have been given good reviews. Tabloids are bad enough, but its actually the local rags that are the worst, mostly being (in my opinion) little more the advertisments pretending to be articles.
|
|
IMO What Car? are biased towards VAG products. Skoda Fabia - best small car, Skoda Octavia - best family car, Audi A3 saloon - better than a BMW 3 series, new A4 - best in class, Passat - best in class, Seat Leon - 'king marvellous etc etc.
The emissions trick scandal has hardly been mentioned, a half page in February's edition. Even then some of the facts about which engines were affected were wrong.
When the Citroen C5 MK3 first came out in 2008 it was a revelation when they compared it to Mondeo/Insignia. Now they give it 2 stars. Trouble is, they haven't actually tested one since 2008.
I think that of the current crop, Auto Express shows least bias.
And yes, I used to love "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" in CAR during the 70's
"VW Scirocco. A Scirocco is a hot desert breeze. The VW is more like a warm, wet f***".
"Vanden Plas 1500: A Pleyland joke"
|
|
|
|
A couple of mags spring to mind where, no matter how worthy the opposition are when comparisons are made, they cannot bear to place (insert any other make) ahead of either any of the BMW or a VW sacred cows! It becomes tiresome to be honest, which is why I haven't bought a car mag in years.
|
|
I don't think it helps that many motoring mags and journos have 'bought into' the spiel from the car and tyre manufacturers that performance is king and comfort is secondary (which is why ridiculousy low profile wheels and tyres are the order of the day, even though most people won't notice much difference unless they break the speed limit regularly (dangerous) or go on track days (unlikely for the vast majority of us).
I'd pay good money for a reliable, comfortable and not overly-expensive car to run, which, unfortunately means I do part with a lot of my hard-earned except when purchasing the car itself, hence why most makes don't offer that sort of car or option.
The car mags are, in my view, just another marketing tool for manufacturers to sell us their cars by pretending they are so much better than we already own (mostly not the case if affordability is taken into account) and will be the 'catalyst to transforming our lives' (which they won't, as with today's levels of traffic most cannot enjoy driving any more - more like draining our wallets).
|
|
My current car - 2015 Subaru Forester XY - is shaping up to be the best car I've ever owned (out of Subaru, BMW, Audi, Ford, Honda, Mazda, Fiat and Renault) yet it gets one star in What Car? and, I think, two stars in CAR.
My previous car - 2006 Subaru Outback - the best car I've owned but possibly about to be toppled - got three stars in What Car?
My wife's Evoque got praised by all the mags, and was a sales sensation, and it is a good car but far too cramped and impractical to be a 5 star car.
A firend recently hired the new Jaguar 3-series size model on holiday and hated it, had a long list of gripes relating to its design and would never consider buying one yet the UK mags praise it to the heavens.
I owned a BMW that blew its cylinder head due to a faulty water reservoir and an A4 that was gutless, noisy and had no room for my size 11 feet - 5 star cars according to the mags.
Take anything you read with a huge pinch of salt.
|
|
For me , it's simple, New cars "should" be perfect and nothing "should" go wrong for any owner from new for the first three years - as a minimum. (I exclude punctures and wear and tear on clutch/brakes)
On that basis, and using Reliability figures, no VAG /JRL product should win any awards. Ever.
Say no more.. and yes I am another who prefers comfort expecially on poor road surfaces .
|
For me , it's simple, New cars "should" be perfect and nothing "should" go wrong for any owner from new for the first three years - as a minimum. (I exclude punctures and wear and tear on clutch/brakes.
Exactly - If a car manufacturer can't produce a product that will last the first three years without suffering "faults" they should consider if they really should be producing cars at all.
|
|
|
|
|
On the other hand i have test driven two different subarus over the last ten years and didn't rate either one, but bought another Nissan on both occasions.
The flatop LR i wouldn't even get into. I would buy a Korean car first.
Car mags test cars IMO that are good for driving, not cars that are always best for owning.
The new dicovery sport won a group test in this months March edition in WC mag, i would have put that in last place and the Merk in first. Its faster more economical has more torque more power, and i don't need 7 seats.
But i wouldn't buy a GLC because it not only has no spare, but no place to even put one.
|
|
Agreed wholeheratedly Xtrailman, thr last three paras in particular.
Autocar, which I've read since I was a boy of 13 in 1961, is I think pretty good at the moment; there was a time when there was too much on supercars but it's fairly well balanced now. they have some good journaliusts there, especially Steve Cropley and Andrew Frankel (who's a freelance). They don't have as many group tests (where I think posters above have seen the bias) and when they do, it's presented as one writer's personal opinion.
Haymarket have been economising recently by having several journalists write for both magazines. I can understand that (I trained as a chartered accountant!) but the magazines have a different purpose and their content needs to reflect that. What Car seems to have diminished in the last year - for example in the new March issue there is no 'Our Cars' long-term test report feature which is one of the most valuable things they do - indeed that any magazine does.
|
|
Until about 10 years ago ( could be longer), Autocar used to publish an article towards the end of each year, called " what broke this year".
This was quite a long list of parts that had gone wrong on the test vehicles during the previous 12 months. I seem to remember that a fairly common entry was for Saab manual gearboxes.
It made for interesting reading, but doubt the manufacturers named were too impressed and that's maybe why it's no longer done.
Anyone else remember it, or any common entries?
Edited by Oli rag on 07/02/2016 at 23:00
|
|
|
What Car seems to have diminished in the last year - for example in the new March issue there is no 'Our Cars' long-term test report feature which is one of the most valuable things they do - indeed that any magazine does.
Agreed, Avant. Another key point is that they no longer keep them long enough to experience a service of the long term test car. They get rid of them just before a service is due in many cases! Thus avoiding any potentially embarrassing customer service or the need for expensive maintenance.
Obviously under pressure from costs, but no longer the consumer champions for cars.
|
|
Which is the consumer champion as they do not take advertising revenue from car manufacturers and buy their test cars from high street garages rather than accept specially prepared demonstators.
But Audi PR Department have the best business model as they loan more cars to stars and people in the public eye than any other manufacturer. So the cars get featured every time the stars get photographed by the press and magazines. e.g Princess Diana, Kate Middleton.
|
It does seem that motoring journalists cannot agree on some cars. Take the Jaguar XE, one major mag said this is now the baby exec to beat while another said it would not worry the (German) establishment! Other manufacturers such as Mazda seem to divide journalist opinion as well.
|
|
One of the mags - can't remember what one - used to dismantle high mileage examples of popular models - took the engine apart and everything, reported any wear and tear.
|
One of the mags - can't remember what one - used to dismantle high mileage examples of popular models - took the engine apart and everything, reported any wear and tear.
I think it was AutoExpress.
|
|
I had Whatcar from the first edition until about 3 years ago when I got fed up with it. I had it on subscription and they didn't even ask me why I was cancelling.
If I buy a magazine now I buy Auto Express, I find it the most interesting for cars that I might buy. I lik ethe accesory tests also.
I subscribe to Which magazine and the car tests aren't like they were. I reckon they hire one for a day or so and use that for their reports. And it wouldn't surprise me at all if palms aren't greased a little bit with their tests. Meile, Samsung and Bosch always do well. In fact the best 10 TVs Samsung have got 9!!!
|
|
It rather depended on whether AutoBild had dismantled a car. IIRC they are or were, linked. Just checked: there is more than a link. Both part of the Axel Springer media group.
|
|
|
Car mags test cars IMO that are good for driving, not cars that are always best for owning.
That touches on a major source of bias affecting even the most careful reviews - what matters to the prospective buyer is generally not the main focus of the review. The ones that wax endlessly on the supposed finer points of handling and performance, for example, are irrelevant to almost everybody.
I have long believed that the best solution to almost any problem is usually the best compromise. This must apply to a family car, which has to do so many different jobs. A car that is focused primarily on one dimension is unlikely to be a good all rounder. Reviews don't favour those cars, as they appear to excel at nothing - but being pretty good at most things is quite an achievement, and those are the cars that people hang on to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
