Motor Trend Magazine - junk?

[Matt Harwood]

I see a lot of guys think that car magazines a biased against domestic cars, but have you considered the other alternative: domestic cars are inferior (or at least were for many years)? I know I'm probably painting a target on my back with a comment like that, but in defense of the car magazines they all have a "subjective" category that attempts to quantify things that can't be directly measured. My personal experience bears this out. I have a 2005 Audi allroad wagon and a 2012 Cadillac CTS wagon. Both are V6 powered, all-wheel-drive station wagons with leather interiors, more than 250 horsepower, automatic transmissions, etc. It's not quite an apples-to-apples comparison, but it's pretty darned close. Despite having 140,000 miles on it and being a design that's probably 6 or 8 years older than the Cadillac, the Audi is still a superior car. The Cadillac is better on paper (more horsepower, bigger brakes, better cornering, slightly quieter, and gets 2-3 MPG better gas mileage), but the Audi just feels better. How? Why? I can't really say. The suspension is more supple but not mushy, the control efforts are consistent, not light at this speed, heavy at that speed, and while they're both AWD, the Audi always feels like it's actively looking for traction while the Cadillac only activates the AWD when it starts to slip. It's a VERY noticeable difference, particularly in the snow where the Audi is confident and the Cadillac is like a rear-wheel-drive car until things start to get hairy (at which point it may be too late). I paid about the same price for both cars, both had similar stickers when they were new, and both have about the same features and amenities. I bought the Cadillac because it looks like a rock star, but there is no denying that the Audi, even with more miles and being two generations older than the Cadillac, is a better car in ways that don't show up on paper and equal in most other ways.

I might also note that I have already spent more on unscheduled Cadillac repairs in the 14 months that I've owned it than in 9 years of Audi ownership. What was everyone saying about the unreliability of foreign cars? The Audi has never asked for more than routine maintenance, the top-of-the-line Cadillac has been through three wheel bearings, an axle shaft, two stereo head units, a sunroof motor, and a driver's seat bracket which didn't really fix the problem.

GM used to make "numbers" cars that would test really well. C4 Corvettes, for example, were the equal of anything else on the planet at the time--on paper. If you've driven one, particularly back-to-back with, say, a Porsche 911 of the same period, then you'd see that while the Corvette is faster, corners harder, stops shorter, and gets better gas mileage, the experience of driving it is quite inferior. GM was awesome at building cars that were paper champions. The key is balancing quality, performance, and things that can't be easily quantified but definitely matter to the driving "experience."

I think too many of us decide that we like one brand of car and never go outside our comfort zone, but it's always my recommendation to drive everything you can afford and buy the one that makes you feel best. That's true of new cars as much as collector cars. There are HUGE differences today, just as there were decades ago.

So no, I don't believe the magazines are biased against any manufacturers, they're calling them like they see them. Just because it goes against what the numbers are saying and our own preconceived notions doesn't mean they're necessarily wrong. When it all comes down to it, it's opinion, not fact (and at least Car & Driver actually says as much in their tests).

That said, I'm still exhausted each time I try to read their magazines, so I don't bother anymore.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[DonMicheletti]

This has been an interesting post. The thing is that we are "car" guys and look at cars differently that what might be considered "the average car owner" to them a car is a thing to get from place to place - that is all. If it does that it is a great car.

Truth is that American car manufacturing was (and is) controlled by accountants and European car companies were controlled by car guys.

The difference shows, in the difficult to quantify subject, "feel" as described by Matt.

I have owned middle of the road American, European and Japanese cars. They each have their own characteristics that defy description when it comes to feel.

I prefer the "feel" of the European cars. That might be because, as has been said, "if they didnt build good handling cars, they could be accused of genocide". (ever drive in Italy, Germany or France?).

So everyone has their own idea of what a "good" car is.

However, I am always amused by the person that says to me: "I have a great car - my mechanic loves it!" Yes, I have been told that.

[Captain Harley]

Some where in all my junk (oops! Valued treasures..) I have an old issue of MT from 1958. One of the main articles in it

was: "Why the Lincoln will fell and the Edsel will succeed" .

AMF

[Guest myold88]

Even before I could drive in the 50's I would bike to the drug store to get the latest issues of MT and Custom Cars, Hot Rod, etc. Today I don't get any. The internet has taken over.

I recently sold a complete set of Special Interest Autos (186 copies) for next to nothing just to make room in my library. Everything I want to read now is right here on the I/net.

[knee-action]

Mr. Padavano...re: post #40...no object ever made by man rusted faster than the Vega automobile. That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

[Bleach]

Mr. Padavano...re: post #40...no object ever made by man rusted faster than the Vega automobile. That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

It's been a documented fact that nothing ever rusted as fast as a Renault Dauphine.

[NTX5467]

A Renault, back then, didn't have enough power to outrun rust.

Key thing is that all car magazines have editorial staffs and orientations which are more aligned with some vehicle purchaser demographics and others might be. What they write is "their orientation" toward a particular vehicle, on a particular day, in a particular location, which might coincide with what a typical owner might encounter or not. In a recent C&D comparison test, the last-gen Chevy Malibu didn't score too well, but when I rented one for a weekend, I found it to be quite an acceptable vehicle. Whether or not the ultimate customer might need extra rear seat leg room is a variable situation, but as I recall, the car lost points for that.

Matt hit on a good point . . . as one manufacturer used to comment . . . "The right car is a matter of feel." This is much more true than any marketing exec (driven by how much of something their car has then another competitor's car might) might ever want to admit to. I used to rent fwd Chrysler 300s and LHSs and liked them a lot. When I rented the first new rwd 300, I was not impressed. It felt big and heavy, in feel and performance (with the same V-6 that now seemed underpowered, at least until I turned off the traction control). But, the last refresh on the Charger has gotten a LOT of the old feel I liked about Chrysler products in it. Same car, different chassis tuning.

Not that MT has become "junk", just that I don't like some of their "new directions". Their COTY award used to be prestigious and cherished, but not there's too many of them. In '66, it was the total Pontiac line of vehicles. In '64, it was the total Ford line of cars and their "Total Performance" orientation. Then came individual models, rather than complete car brand lines (as noted above, with some real "winners", over time). Then it got to be "new for that model year", rather than an improved version of the original vehicle a few years prior. Then we added "Import COTY", "Truck of the Year", and now we have import brands (in the USA) getting the award from a USA magazine!

And, some manufacturers have seemed to game the COTY system by staggering the introduction of their new vehicles. One year, the Chevy Caprice was the COTY, when it was redesigned. Next year, it was a similar Ford, when it got redesigned. It went on that way for several years, in the 1990s.

Over the years, including decades, I feel that MT is not what it used to be. I felt the road test results were unbiased and factual, in general. In the '90s, C&D had some testers who consistently got great "numbers", reliably, in their road tests. Perhaps the prior "perceived honesty" in prior decades of MT has been somewhat masked by their new print format and all of the ads in the back of the magazine? Compare what we now have with some of the archived MT road tests at www.wildaboutcarsonline.com . Not even in the same league, regarding car "action shots" and such? Pictures of interiors (which WERE worth taking pictures of!) and engine compartments (similarly!), for example. Words, pictures, specs . . . it all worked together to inform the reader with real-world-valuable information. Sometimes, though, it seemed that MT didn't get a car that had the right rear axle ratio or engine for the best overall performance, which resulted in some results being skewed somewhat from what was "normal" equipment.

When Petersen Publications was going strong, they had premier publications, period. Others did well, too, generally, but with a "different flavor" of sorts. But by the earlier '70s, the many consolidations/buy-outs were happening, for better or for worse. As with other industrial/retail consolidations, I'm not sure we're better off with many magazines being under the umbrella of "common ownership", as commodities to be "invested in" in an "appliance" sort of way. But if you look at the auto parts suppliers, even OEM suppliers, you'll find many brands under one umbrella, rather as individual companies, just as with many home appliances.

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[Larry W]

It's been a documented fact that nothing ever rusted as fast as a Renault Dauphine.

One of the best cars I've ever owned was an '83 Renault Alliance. Nearly 200K miles before it got T-boned.

[joe_padavano]

Mr. Padavano...re: post #40...no object ever made by man rusted faster than the Vega automobile. That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

Tough call. I did own a Vega when I lived in L.A. The car lived it's entire life in SoCal, yet the TOPS of the front fenders were rusting out. Go figure.

[stock_steve]

Tough call. I did own a Vega when I lived in L.A. The car lived it's entire life in SoCal, yet the TOPS of the front fenders were rusting out. Go figure.

My father bought a new Vega, maybe '73 or '74 or so, and only kept it about one year or so, he was so disgusted with the poor quality (and he had been a GM man all his life). Surprisingly, though, he replaced it with a Pontiac Astre (Vega clone but had the "Iron Duke" engine), and seemed pretty happy in general with that one.

The Vega had been the most basic, bare-bones Sedan model, with rubber floormats etc., but the Astre was kind of a spiffed-up little wagon, with whitewalls, shiny trim rings, roof rack, rich metallic brown paint, etc.. Maybe it just made him feel better owning a little bit nicer *looking* car...

[R W Burgess]

I've owned 2 Vega's guys, both brought brand new. They were both GT's, 4 speeds, racing stripes, etc., and were fun to drive. I traded the '72 in on a '74 SS Nova, had a bad accident, and had to replace it, as the wife needed something decent to drive to work. So, we traded the wrecked Nova for a new 1974 Vega. I kept neither car more than 2 years so they were as perfect when I sold them as when I bought them. I keep thinking back to those days of buying news cars every couple of years in my youth, though. Gosh, kids today could never afford to do that. I wonder what happened, for another day's discussion I guess.

At any rate, I moved up to a 1976 Cutlass after the Vega phase and have never looked back. Oh, and I don't buy new cars anymore either. Spending my retirement on new automobiles these days just seems ridiculous to me????

[X-Frame]

I am glad my post has brought some interest and a great dialogue about various publications.

There has been some talk about how back in the 1970s they were import bias yet American cars started to loose their way in the 1980s as they went to FWD, changed more to unibody designs using cheap methods of construction, and downsized.

But at the same time do people recall how when Honda Civic, one of the first modern era import that took off in America, were often labeled as “Rice Burners” because they were Japanese? That WWII was still fresh in some people's minds since it was less than 30 years past then? They were boycotted by older buyers who stressed “American Made All the Way”.

Edited December 30, 2014 by X-Frame (see edit history)

[Guest WEB 38]

I Have a 75 vega cosworth owened it for the last 16 years zero rust. Bill

[joe_padavano]

To get this thread back on track, one further indication of the state of Motor Trend.

First, a little background. I dropped my MT subscription in the early 1980s. A few months ago, when Petersen-EMAP-Primedia-SourceInterlink-TEN Publishing killed Rod and Custom, they credited my remaining two years of subscription to a Motor Trend subscription. I got a couple of issues before I got that changed to simply extending my Street Rodder subscription (why would an R&C reader want MT???). In any case, I also got on their email list and get weekly MT update emails. A few moments ago, the latest one hit my inbox. One of the hard-hitting feature stories included was "15 Cars with the Most Beautiful Lights".

'Nuf said...

[Bleach]

Most beautiful lights?!? MEH! I can't stand any of those new lights. They blind me so badly as they approach me at night that I'm forced to look to the fog line. I feel one of these days these so call "beautifail" lights will cause me to run off the road or plow right into them. So much for safety.

[rocketraider]

At any rate, I moved up to a 1976 Cutlass after the Vega phase and have never looked back.

You know, when I talked with my Hurst/Olds's original selling dealer in Kinston NC, found that the guy who bought it new had traded in a 1972 Vega GT on it.

The Vega's lot was cast very much like the Olds/GM passenger car Diesel. By the time the bugs had been worked out and they became fairly reliable, the earlier reputation had doomed them, and the magazine's must shoulder their share of blame for damning them.

I don't know many kids today who can afford to buy any type of new car. The cars aimed at the youth market tend to be priced out of that market's price range. I can remember when any teenager pumping gas or bagging groceries could buy and insure a new car and sometimes even a musclecar.

[Guest WEB 38]

Talk about a mag that turned into a rag. Old cars weekly.

[X-Frame]

Most beautiful lights?!? MEH! I can't stand any of those new lights. They blind me so badly as they approach me at night that I'm forced to look to the fog line. I feel one of these days these so call "beautifail" lights will cause me to run off the road or plow right into them. So much for safety.

I believe it is called "old age" As we get older we also get more night blind and lights bother us. Just have to adapt and use preventative measures like those yellow tint night glasses that brighten up things and prevent the flare-glare. They do work. I have seen similar visor adaptors advertised on television lately that slide down.

[X-Frame]

I don't know many kids today who can afford to buy any type of new car. The cars aimed at the youth market tend to be priced out of that market's price range. I can remember when any teenager pumping gas or bagging groceries could buy and insure a new car and sometimes even a musclecar.

Signs of the times. Remember when a Corvette was priced just a little more than a standard car? There are cars out there kids can buy but they seem to want speed and power which equals HIGH insurance rates which makes buying these cars a moot point. The down side is that these kids often drive without insurance and you don't find out until after the fact.

[Marty Roth]

Signs of the times. Remember when a Corvette was priced just a little more than a standard car? There are cars out there kids can buy but they seem to want speed and power which equals HIGH insurance rates which makes buying these cars a moot point. The down side is that these kids often drive without insurance and you don't find out until after the fact.

Many states, such as Louisiana, REQUIRE (minimum value) Liability Auto Insurance - but, many individuals but insurance with these "so-called" cheapie companies and keep it just barely long enough to get a license plate and state MV Inspection Sticker - then the insurance is cancelled. When one of these folks hits your car, they provide the patrolman with "proof" of insurance and the officer has non way of kn owing that the policy has lapsed or was cancelled - and you are stuck unless you have an "Uninsured Motorist Coverage" at your own cost on your own policy.

[Paul Dobbin]

Marty said, " you are stuck unless you have an "Uninsured Motorist Coverage" at your own cost or on your own policy."

You are not required to carry that in FL and other states and for 30 years I fought with insureds over having it. Think if it this way, the 20% uninsured/under insured driver's cause 60% of the accidents. Says a lot about responsibility which is revealed by the Credit Score.

Now, off my soapbox and enjoying using up my collector cars.

Edited December 31, 2014 by Paul Dobbin
correction (see edit history)

[X-Frame]

In Virginia you have to have either Uninsured Motorist or Insurance but only have to check Yes or No with no proof when registering your car. The DMV will do random checks but could take years if ever before you are chosen to be audited.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

In Virginia you have to have either Uninsured Motorist or Insurance but only have to check Yes or No with no proof when registering your car. The DMV will do random checks but could take years if ever before you are chosen to be audited.

I believe the OP referenced Motor Trend Magazine somewhere in this thread? Has anyone thought about notifying MT that there are less than complementary posts here, thus, giving them a chance to defend?

It has now gone to Insurance issues so I highly doubt it.

Peter J.

[rocketraider]

Their market isn't necessarily our demographic so they could probably not care less. When I cancelled C&D and demanded refund of my cash it was like, oh well, someone else will read it.

The DMV will do random checks but could take years if ever before you are chosen to be audited.

They claim it's random, but I got audited 4 years in a row on the same vehicle till I called down there and raised a stink. Asked 'em if the other three were suitably insured why would they think that specific car was not insured? Then the next year I got one for a different vehicle and I called again. That call seemed to stop it. Haven't gotten an audit form in years. Now watch one come this week.

They blind me so badly as they approach me at night that I'm forced to look to the fog line.

It's not necessarily old age and light sensitivity. New GM trucks and several Asian brands have lights that will burn your eyes out on low beams. It's the reflector and lens design. Most of 'em have foglights on concurrent with low beams so you also have a high-powered and usually badly aimed foglight putting a death ray on you. People apparently don't realise foglights are every bit as bright and powerful as most high beams, and they have 'em on in perfectly clear weather- no fog within 100 miles. Then you have the idiots who either don't know or refuse to acknowledge their vehicle is equipped with a dimmer switch... but I'm sure the "enthusiast" magazines think those death-ray lights are great and give them high marks. Edited December 31, 2014 by rocketraider (see edit history)