'06 MT Car of the Year: Proof that you don't need to be objective to make a magazine

For anyone who didn't know, that bubble-a**ed Civic won. Whatever...I won't even go into that. Lets look objectively at the rest of the field, and see why it is I believe Motor Trend has gone from being a decent, reputable publication from its infancy into the mid '90s, and has culminated with a team of a**clowns for at least the past 2 years...

1) The Audi A3 was a "finalist." Their take on it? Engine is great, DSG tranny is so good that "once you've used it, you won't want any other transmission." They called it a "VW for social climbers." Basically, they liked the look and liked the tranny, and said it was fun to toss around, but caption the whole article with the statement that the car is "trying to prove that less can sometimes cost more." Cost: $30k. This is enough to make the car a finalist...interesting.

2) Buick Lucerne. They talk about how considerable engineering was put into making the car quiet. They said the V8 model felt "spry." They called it a good deal until they said the Azera (which was also a "finalist, BTW), while smaller, is faster and gives better build quality for a lower price. We all know in this field of car, faster is far more crucial :rolleyes: than size or a quiet ride. They never quantify how the Hyundai had better build quality than the Buick, either. All in all, faint praise, and little of it.

3) DTS. Here's where we start getting some funny stuff!! :mad: "Styling a solid evolution of Caddy's edgy look." "Fit and finish are much improved, with a decent choice of wood tones and just the right amount of flash. But here's much of the elegant new switchgear in the lesser Buick Lucerne, and even in new Chevys. While its true you'll recognize Mercedes switchgear in Chryslers, its not so obvious as to put Benz buyers off. And while the Chrysler looks like its trading up, the shared pieces in the Cadillac make it look like its trading down."

WTF?????????? :mad: :mad: :mad: They know Benz buyers aren't put off by Chrysler switchgear in their cars, so its ok...but GM can't do the same because Caddy buyers should be angry? WTF is this crap? Ok, lets continue...the rest of the article says Northstar = good, chassis dynamics = ok, overall assessment is that its a car to drive your boss around in. Ok...

4) Cobalt. They tested a base SS 4 door, and the performance was very good...0-60 = 7.1, 1/4 = 15.6, lateral g = .83. They liked the drive. In the slalom and their figure 8 course, the car was "producing results on par with those from the A3 and Lexus GS430." However, "track prowess aside, the SS sedan failed to impress us in several key respects, notably interior quality and ergonomics. For a car that commands a $20k price tag, the SS's plastics were underwhelming to the look and touch" (again, who fondles their dashboard? I don't...and the design, IMO, is better than that crackpot Civic, too). "In light of the all-new Honda Civic, as well as the Hyundai Accent (which looks worse than an Aveo and did 0-60 in 11.8 seconds!!!!!!!!!!!!), the Cobalt ultimately lacked the competitive sophistication to be a real contender." Summary? "The best Cavalier ever!" :mad:

5) Impala SS. "One trick pony." "The cabin is either clean or bland." "We'd like it with a bit more soul, and a lot more driving pleasure." I won't even get started on this one...basically, the car is too bland to be noticed, and doesn't handle that well. I can see the bland point, but to call the car a one-trick pony is pretty BS when a slower A3 that is 1/2 the size is the same $$$$.

To sum this up, they liked the Fusion enough to call it a finalist...called the Solstice "a solid base hit, but short of the promised home run," then went on to praise everything with a Hyundai badge. The Hyundais are good, but the GMs are pretty damn good to.

And that whole Cadillac switchgear thing proves to me, once and for all, that GM can't (and won't) get a break. That is as bad as C&D admitting in the sport compact shootout "I'd rather tell my neighbor I drive an Acura than a Dodge."

They s*ck. I don't even read MT anymore

the best Cavalier.....:mad: #%%#%# clowns its not a Cavalier!!!

Great perforamnce from the 4 door SS though

Sadly, it is a Cavalier. Just as the G6 is a Grand Am. GM has alienated buyers of those nameplates to offload the "baggage" of those well known names.

Both of those names were good names that had history and both names could have been put on those cars without ruining the car's image.

Magazines are all biased, just as all media are biased. It takes a long time to get over a well earned bias that GM and Ford have going against them. All they can do is keep coming out with cars that are a hit and eventually the magazines will come around too.

Don't worry about the Car of the Year award. If you look up what cars have gotten it, you'd be pretty surprised. Vega, Monza, K-car, etc

Interesting... you basically got pissed at most of their negative comments on the domestics and their positive comments on the foreign cars. Verrrry black and whi... er, interesting.:p

Oh, and FWIW MT has explained their car of the year award to simply be an award to the car that has made the greatest leaps forward and most impact in its segment. The new civic is a major step up in its segment IMO and is very innovative in quite a few ways - they just don't have a very impressive performance model for their sports edition (si), so many of you guys automatically think it sucks.:p

Essentially you can count on the truck of the year almost always being the newest and most significantly changed truck in the market. Such as I can almost gaurentee you that something in the GMT-900 lineup will win truck of the year once it comes out and almost every brand and model of new truck will have a great chance of winning in the year it comes out.

Oh, and anyone who thinks Lucerne should win car of the year needs to realize this is the 2006 car of the year award, not the 1996 where the Olds Aurora was a contender.:p

Further renforcement of why I cancelled my subscription a couple of years ago. I pick up a copy every once and a while, if something really interests me. Motor Trend really went down hill when there current editor-in-chief Angus Mackenzie came on board, but what do you expect he is from England. He has no idea what American cars are about. If you glance at his monthly editoral he is always focusing on whats going on in Europe.

Another problem I have with MT is there pics. they use suck, I remember last years COY there was no detailed pics. of any of the cars, except the winner. Last months issue with the GTO vs SRT8 the pics. were so grainy it looked like they used a really low mega-pixel camera.

I don't read magazines anyway; the SRT-8 v. GTO comparo was crap. They led it up to be a muscle car comparo, then picked the luxury car? I could have told you it wasn't going to be a domestic for COY, mainly because it's a magazine writing the article and doing the choosing. Just like for the 10Best, the only domestic that's a sure shot is the Corvette. Other than that, it's pretty much going to be majority imports.

...

I have to agree with Threxx on this one. I don't see what the big deal is. So the Civic won, so what? I usually skim through mags like Motor trend, C&D, Automobile, etc, but I don't take them very seriously.

Yea I don't think a magazine would ever influence what car I was going to buy.

[QUOTE=tls2000]Sadly, it is a Cavalier. Just as the G6 is a Grand Am. GM has alienated buyers of those nameplates to offload the "baggage" of those well known names.

Both of those names were good names that had history and both names could have been put on those cars without ruining the car's image.

QUOTE]


Okay lets look at this objectively:

The Cobalt is a delta chasis car---the Cavalier is a J-body
No interchangeable parts.

Grand Am was a N-body.....G6 is a Epslison chasiss
No interchangeable parts.

Ruining the Cavaliers imgage? It had no image--it was really old, outdated and obsolete! It was junk in most peoples mind---not competitve at all--that name could not be saved.

Grand Am---it had a decent rep and good sales. That one doesn't make sense why they changed the name and might not have been a good move.

So sadly, your are wrong. Its a Cobalt and a great car for GM.

Now try to debate what I have said. Its a fact that a Cobalt is not a Cavalier:rolleyes:

Yup, I didn’t renew my subscription to MT back in 2003 and don’t plan on it anytime soon. Nothing I hate more in a supposedly subjective magazine article than blatant bias.





Oh thanks 305fan,

I didn’t want to say it myself about the G6 and Cobalt, some of these ignorant comments that just keep coming back to the forum are becoming too much for me to defend everyday.:rolleyes:

Yeah I know!:D

If he's saying the the Coblat is the Cavaliers succesor--then thats okay.

What is Motor Trend magazine? :D Probably something I overlook when I hastily grab my monthly or bi-monthly issues of Car Craft, High Performance Pontiac, Pontiac Performers,Camaro Performers, Chevy High Performance, and my favorite GM High Tech Performance.:) And now that I typed this out, now I know where forty of my dollars magically disappear to each month.

Interesting... you basically got pissed at most of their negative comments on the domestics and their positive comments on the foreign cars. Verrrry black and whi... er, interesting.:p

Oh, and FWIW MT has explained their car of the year award to simply be an award to the car that has made the greatest leaps forward and most impact in its segment. The new civic is a major step up in its segment IMO and is very innovative in quite a few ways - they just don't have a very impressive performance model for their sports edition (si), so many of you guys automatically think it sucks.:p


Oh, and anyone who thinks Lucerne should win car of the year needs to realize this is the 2006 car of the year award, not the 1996 where the Olds Aurora was a contender.:p

1) I knew you wouldn't like what I had to say Threxx, and I knew you'd be verbal about it. I also knew you'd twist what I had to say :) Good job!
2) My problem with the Civic is that I don't see where its so innovative. If GM came out with a dash that bad, it would be completelt panned. Its awful. The exterior is sinfully ugly as well. But you know what? I don't even care that its COTY. That's fine. My rant is not about that. My rant is about comments like the DTS switchgear. How an Audi that can't even run with an Impy SS, and is the size of a Civic for $30k, is a finalist when they called it an overpriced Golf, more or less. How a Cobalt SS is considered lower than an ACCENT in certain respects.

That isn't bias to you? If not, Threxx, what is? That's objective journalism in your mind?

3) No one said the Lucerne should be car of the year. I didn't say it. Did you?


Like I said in my original post...Civic as car of the year? I don't care. But the switchgear comments and some of the other crap just proves the point that MT (led by that twit Angus Mackenzie, as someone else pointed out) has gone way downhill in terms of OBJECTIVE journalism. And the problem is that the less informed readers DO listen to these rags when they buy their cars.

What is Motor Trend magazine? :D Probably something I overlook when I hastily grab my monthly or bi-monthly issues of Car Craft, High Performance Pontiac, Pontiac Performers,Camaro Performers, Chevy High Performance, and my favorite GM High Tech Performance.:) And now that I typed this out, now I know where forty of my dollars magically disappear to each month.i know the feeling:cry:

I usually agree with Mark Phelan's reviews in the Detroit Free Press. His take on the new Civic is that it lacks the kinds of things that made past Civics some of the most fun compact cars around....

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051201/BUSINESS02/512010457/1015

I don't know why everyone gets so fired up when people say the Cobalt's interior sucks. Sure, the layout isn't bad, but some of the materials are closer to those used in making my garbage cans than those that are in my 5 year old VW. I've sat in one about 5 times, and the first thing that I notice is that the dash screams "cheap."

Even on their other cars, I see lots of things that suggest they don't pay attention to details. For example, on the new Buick (la crosse) when you open the door, you see non-glossy paint and visible spot welds. Ok who cares, but walk over to an import car (or even the Ford 500) in the same or lower price class, and most have glossy paint in the door jambs and have somehow hidden all the spot welds. The thought process that goes through a customer's mind is this: "If they aren't "sweating the details" here, where else aren't they?

In regards to the MT article: MT sucks. The new Civic is underwhelming.

Interesting... you basically got pissed at most of their negative comments on the domestics and their positive comments on the foreign cars. Verrrry black and whi... er, interesting.:p

Oh, and FWIW MT has explained their car of the year award to simply be an award to the car that has made the greatest leaps forward and most impact in its segment. The new civic is a major step up in its segment IMO and is very innovative in quite a few ways - they just don't have a very impressive performance model for their sports edition (si), so many of you guys automatically think it sucks.:p

Essentially you can count on the truck of the year almost always being the newest and most significantly changed truck in the market. Such as I can almost gaurentee you that something in the GMT-900 lineup will win truck of the year once it comes out and almost every brand and model of new truck will have a great chance of winning in the year it comes out.

Oh, and anyone who thinks Lucerne should win car of the year needs to realize this is the 2006 car of the year award, not the 1996 where the Olds Aurora was a contender.:p
Why has the Civic made the greatest leaps forward and most impact in its segment? Surely since this is what the award is for they will tell you in quotes in the artical? If this is what the award is for, someone tell me how the Audi came in second "trying to prove that less can sometimes cost more." How is that leaps forward and an impact on the market, unless if people now think less = more $.:confused:

I don't know why everyone gets so fired up when people say the Cobalt's interior sucks. Sure, the layout isn't bad, but some of the materials are closer to those used in making my garbage cans than those that are in my 5 year old VW. I've sat in one about 5 times, and the first thing that I notice is that the dash screams "cheap."

Even on their other cars, I see lots of things that suggest they don't pay attention to details. For example, on the new Buick (la crosse) when you open the door, you see non-glossy paint and visible spot welds. Ok who cares, but walk over to an import car (or even the Ford 500) in the same or lower price class, and most have glossy paint in the door jambs and have somehow hidden all the spot welds. The thought process that goes through a customer's mind is this: "If they aren't "sweating the details" here, where else aren't they?

In regards to the MT article: MT sucks. The new Civic is underwhelming.

Plastic is plastic. The Germans have learned to conceal the cheap glossy look of it by painting it. Unfortunately heat, humidity, abuse, and the oils in the human hand cause it to peel soon after most of the press have returned the car to the manufacturer. How do I know this? Because I consistently have customers(Im a BMW tech) bringing their $75,000-$130,000 745/750/760's in to have the b-pillars/kickpanels/a/c vents/ center console release buttons/ etc. replaced after the paint peeled off from 15-30k miles of use.

I don't know why everyone gets so fired up when people say the Cobalt's interior sucks. Sure, the layout isn't bad, but some of the materials are closer to those used in making my garbage cans than those that are in my 5 year old VW. I've sat in one about 5 times, and the first thing that I notice is that the dash screams "cheap."

In regards to the MT article: MT sucks. The new Civic is underwhelming.

I guess I get fired up on the Cobalt because I really like it. I know you aren't alone in your opinion, though...a couple other people seem to feel the same way you do regarding the "cheapness." Frankly though, C&D really liked the inside of the Cobalt. If they like it, being the biggest of the dashboard fondlers, I guess I figured it was pretty damn good. I mean, I love it inside...but what do I know :D

Plastic is plastic. The Germans have learned to conceal the cheap glossy look of it by painting it. Unfortunately heat, humidity, abuse, and the oils in the human hand cause it to peel soon after most of the press have returned the car to the manufacturer. How do I know this? Because I consistently have customers(Im a BMW tech) bringing their $75,000-$130,000 745/750/760's in to have the b-pillars/kickpanels/a/c vents/ center console release buttons/ etc. replaced after the paint peeled off from 15-30k miles of use.

I don't know what BMW and MB are using, but other than 1 out of my 4 door handles, I've had no paint peeling or other damage in nearly 6 years and 90,000 miles. Only really cheap thing was that the floormats were as heavy duty as cardboard.

I will say that it's stupid to paint door handles and switches, no matter who does it.

Painted interior? You mean like my GMT-800 Silverado had all over the hollow PVC-plastic snap-together dash? That stuff wore off in any area where hands were commonly placed.

Painted interior? You mean like my GMT-800 Silverado had all over the hollow PVC-plastic snap-together dash? That stuff wore off in any area where hands were commonly placed.

I've got an '03 Suburban; it doesn't have PVC-plastic interior; nor any painted plastic. Nothing's worn off and nothings broke either. My father in law has a '99 GMC 1-ton. Again, no "pvc-plastic" and no painted plastic either and nothing broken. My brother in law has an '01 Sierra 1500. Funny: nothing pvc, painted, or broken on his vehicle either. I'm skeptical: what year was yours? There's a big difference between "cheap appearance" and "an actual lack of durability".

GMT800's are GM's biggest seller, platform-wise. I'll open this up to everybody else: GMT800 owners: tell me about your PVC-plastic (yes, I'm being literal here -- you didn't say PVC-like, you said "PVC-plastic"), painted plastic, and broken interiors.

I've got an '03 Suburban; it doesn't have PVC-plastic interior; nor any painted plastic. Nothing's worn off and nothings broke either. My father in law has a '99 GMC 1-ton. Again, no "pvc-plastic" and no painted plastic either and nothing broken. My brother in law has an '01 Sierra 1500. Funny: nothing pvc, painted, or broken on his vehicle either. I'm skeptical: what year was yours? There's a big difference between "cheap appearance" and "an actual lack of durability".

GMT800's are GM's biggest seller, platform-wise. I'll open this up to everybody else: GMT800 owners: tell me about your PVC-plastic (yes, I'm being literal here -- you didn't say PVC-like, you said "PVC-plastic"), painted plastic, and broken interiors.

PVC was in my estimation and from what I've heard from several others, as well.

Painted is a fact. You're wrong. Period. I've seen the paint come off several GMT-800 vehicles including mine, a couple Tahoes, an Escalade, and a Yukon Denali.

Don't believe me? find a hidden place anywhere along the dash and take some very light grain sandpaper to it to simulate a couple years of normal use with somebody who often rests their hand on the dash or whatnot. Whether it was originally beige, gray, or black, it'll come off and reveal flat black plastic underneath.

It's especially apparent on the tan interior, though.

I guess when the paint came off mine and I was surprised and the dealer said "oh, the paint just wore off.. that happens all the time, we'll order another trim piece - just try to keep your hands off of it when you can as it'll just come right off again", that he was just lying to me?:p

This stuff (http://www.gmfullsize.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32611) is VERY (http://www.gmfullsize.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31047) common on the GM truck boards. A lot of the guys won't admit/complain about it, but that's why so many of those guys resort to sanding and painting their dashes with profesional car paint or using suede or buying new 'upgraded' trim, etc.

Even I know MT scribes wouldn't know which way is UP. Who would take them so seriously anyway... apart from the automakers receiving the awards?

I was also amazed that the Civic took it.
I had all my money on the 3 series. Powerful engine, new design, and still the best car in its class.
Civic...eh
What I dont get is what is "Fun to drive"? That you can rev the car to 8k rpm? The total lack of torque? The interior looks like it was layed out by a child, and everything looks very cheap. It wins gee-wiz points with the 6spd manual and the DVD navi, but the outside looks someone left an Ion coupe in a wind tunnel. The rake is waaaaaay too much, the body lacks any serious style (par for the course), and its only really nice thing I liked about it were the nice seats. Thats it. Engine is high strung, as they all have, its blander then all hell, and if it wasnt for that red metalic paint, the car would blend in. I have seen several new Civics, and they are REALLY ugly. The sedan is just flat out horrid. I cannot belive it won car of the year.
I dont think any GM car should have won either, outside of the Solstice, but the Civic? Did they include the HHR? Maybe thats too "niche" for COTY? Tack on the Solstice as well. Cobalt deffinatly is falling behind the new onslaught of import compeditors, I will say that much, but its still not a bad car. I cant belive that ANY Hyundai would be considerd is amazing in itself. Sorry, they could put a million mile warranty, and they still fall apart.

Motor Trend judges their Car of the Year on the best and most significant NEWLY INTRODUCED car that year. With that as a guideline, I'm not really surprised Honda got it.

Best and most significant can be something that is simply innovative, or creates a whole new class of automobile. If Bulgaria came out with a solar powered car that worked, was cheap, but looked like a Yugo, it would still be COTY because it's innovative, and goes into a new direction. That's just the way MT's rules are set up.

Being the BEST new car of that year has nothing to do with their choice, and neither does being the bast new car on the market if it's over a year old.

Pretty crappy guidelines IMO.

I had all my money on the 3 series. Powerful engine, new design, and still the best car in its class.


I would be with you on that. How the Civic won out over it is beyond me.

I personally think the Civic should have won. But, I do think they should have used a better optioned Cobalt as the stripper models can really make them look a lot cheaper than they really are.

I guess the Lucerne should've had something as useless as self-turn on wipers, instead of something actually useful like its heated washer fluid...

I'd buy one. After watching Danica Patrick drive one on Speed TV's test drive, I'd buy anything. I don't really know what they said about the car.

I sat in the new civic at the auto show here. The first thing I noticed is how simliar the massive dash is to my camaro. Funny, because one of the common complaints about the fbods was that the dash reminded them of a football field it was so big. Now that the civic has it, the press labels it as helping the car seem to have a larger interior then it does.

I sat in the new civic at the auto show here. The first thing I noticed is how simliar the massive dash is to my camaro. Funny, because one of the common complaints about the fbods was that the dash reminded them of a football field it was so big. Now that the civic has it, the press labels it as helping the car seem to have a larger interior then it does.

so true.

Remeber C4 Vettes had digital speedos--press hated them. But the the S2000 comes out and has....DIGITAL speedos. Press doesn't say a word cause its in a Honda.:rolleyes:

No surprise at all. Car and Driver would have made the same comments, if not worse.

No offense to any current or former Motor Trend fans on board, but IMO MT has been a magazine geared toward the 8th grade study hall doodler crowd since it started. I liked it when I was younger, but nowhere near as well as I liked CandD (despite their obvious Japan-leanings). When I got a little older, I let all my subscriptions expire, except CandD. Then I got so fed up that I let that one expire too.

Now that I'm an adult, I prefer Road & Track over the rest of the "big 4" (CandD, MT, R&T, and Automobile). I still think CandD has some of the best writing (pretty entertaining), but I can't put up with their incessant anti-GM crap. They choose to make anti-GM comments when writing about vehicles or other things that have nothing to do with GM. It is unbelievable, really.

Road & Track seems to be the most balanced, IMO. Plus they have good photography and good tech data pages. I just wish they would shrink the "Track" portion and focus on the road tests, because it doesn't make sense for a monthly magazine to cover racing...by the time the mag comes out, the event is 2 months old (long lead time to produce each issue).

Jason E, I haven't read this year's COTY article, but it sounds like all the others I've read in the recent past. Even GM vehicles that are highly praised by them in earlier issues (whether as standalone tests or comparison tests) get blasted or just nit-picked to death when it is time for COTY.

I too am appalled that it is ok for DCX to share some of the M-B switchgear with the lower brands when Mercedes had their own, distinctive, if not necessarily attractive switchgear style, if it is not OK for GM to do the same. Not to mention the zillions of other cars that do it (VW/Audi, a least a little bit of Lexus/Toyota), etc. We are talking power window switches and stuff like that, for crying out loud.

Lame.

PVC was in my estimation and from what I've heard from several others, as well.

The hard stuff is usually ABS and molded in color. No paint. Paint is expensive.

I'll look at a dash when I get a chance. My brother-in-law has a 2001ish Suburban.

I too am appalled that it is ok for DCX to share some of the M-B switchgear with the lower brands when Mercedes had their own, distinctive, if not necessarily attractive switchgear style, if it is not OK for GM to do the same. Not to mention the zillions of other cars that do it (VW/Audi, a least a little bit of Lexus/Toyota), etc. We are talking power window switches and stuff like that, for crying out loud.

Lame.
Yeah, that kind of tells you how far they had to dig to come up with a complaint. I liked MT in high school too, I don't even read it now. I like GMHTP, PopHotRod, all the Corvette stuff, but the big 4....nah.

I guess the Lucerne should've had something as useless as self-turn on wipers, instead of something actually useful like its heated washer fluid...

Well then I'm sure you'll be excited to hear the Lucerne does have "self-turn on wipers" as standard equipment on its middle and upper models.:lol:

What I dont understand is what does the Civic bring to the table that wasnt there before?
A 2 dr coupe compact? Nope
An 4cyl engine that makes near 200hp? Nope
Good handling? Nope
DVD Navigation? Nope
Hybrid Compact? Nope
WHAT exactly does the Civic have to offer over that would make someone that had zero bias, buy? I still think that while the car is good, there are cars that do it better. I still think that the Mazda3 is THE prime compact car out there. It does everything that the Civic does, a year and some change ago. Only thing that Honda did was offer a coupe.
I wonder what would happen if Saturn brought over the Astra model here, would it get COTY? Or would it just get beat up for its badge engieering, or some other anti-GM rip?

What ever the case may be, next year could be heavily dominated by GM. 900's and the Aura, as long as they stick to there guns, we could be looking at Car and Trucks of the year.

What I dont understand is what does the Civic bring to the table that wasnt there before?
A 2 dr coupe compact? Nope
An 4cyl engine that makes near 200hp? Nope
Good handling? Nope
DVD Navigation? Nope
Hybrid Compact? Nope
WHAT exactly does the Civic have to offer over that would make someone that had zero bias, buy? I still think that while the car is good, there are cars that do it better. I still think that the Mazda3 is THE prime compact car out there. It does everything that the Civic does, a year and some change ago. Only thing that Honda did was offer a coupe.
I wonder what would happen if Saturn brought over the Astra model here, would it get COTY? Or would it just get beat up for its badge engieering, or some other anti-GM rip?

What ever the case may be, next year could be heavily dominated by GM. 900's and the Aura, as long as they stick to there guns, we could be looking at Car and Trucks of the year.
Maybe because it has all of those things and does them well. I think maybe there's more to the story than just stats and features. Why don't you try sitting in one?

I'm not a Honda Civic fanboy whatsoever...in fact I've led most of my life disliking Civics. But this new one is an absolute homerun.

No surprise at all. Car and Driver would have made the same comments, if not worse.

No offense to any current or former Motor Trend fans on board, but IMO MT has been a magazine geared toward the 8th grade study hall doodler crowd since it started. I liked it when I was younger, but nowhere near as well as I liked CandD (despite their obvious Japan-leanings). When I got a little older, I let all my subscriptions expire, except CandD. Then I got so fed up that I let that one expire too.

Now that I'm an adult, I prefer Road & Track over the rest of the "big 4" (CandD, MT, R&T, and Automobile). I still think CandD has some of the best writing (pretty entertaining), but I can't put up with their incessant anti-GM crap. They choose to make anti-GM comments when writing about vehicles or other things that have nothing to do with GM. It is unbelievable, really.

Road & Track seems to be the most balanced, IMO. Plus they have good photography and good tech data pages. I just wish they would shrink the "Track" portion and focus on the road tests, because it doesn't make sense for a monthly magazine to cover racing...by the time the mag comes out, the event is 2 months old (long lead time to produce each issue).

Jason E, I haven't read this year's COTY article, but it sounds like all the others I've read in the recent past. Even GM vehicles that are highly praised by them in earlier issues (whether as standalone tests or comparison tests) get blasted or just nit-picked to death when it is time for COTY.

I too am appalled that it is ok for DCX to share some of the M-B switchgear with the lower brands when Mercedes had their own, distinctive, if not necessarily attractive switchgear style, if it is not OK for GM to do the same. Not to mention the zillions of other cars that do it (VW/Audi, a least a little bit of Lexus/Toyota), etc. We are talking power window switches and stuff like that, for crying out loud.

Lame.

My worst greviance against Road and Track is their crapy times!!

They can't get a Z06 into the 11's and they just test a GTO--400hp and a 13.7??>? Yeah right!:rolleyes:

M/Ts not great but they usually have a car in the mag that I want to read about, so I buy it:p

My worst greviance against Road and Track is their crapy times!!

They can't get a Z06 into the 11's and they just test a GTO--400hp and a 13.7??>? Yeah right!:rolleyes:

M/Ts not great but they usually have a car in the mag that I want to read about, so I buy it:p

They test cars driven with 'manufacturer guidelines'. In other words they don't do things like run with an almost empty tank, lower tire pressure for better traction, remove the air filter, run 250rpm past redline, power shift, brake torque, etc...

They test cars driven with 'manufacturer guidelines'. In other words they don't do things like run with an almost empty tank, lower tire pressure for better traction, remove the air filter, run 250rpm past redline, power shift, brake torque, etc...

Okay but Car and Driver does the same thing. Full tank, redline observed ect.

The problem with Motor Trend and Car and Driver are not so much their opinions but their lack of consistency. Like others have said, they will pan an American car for something but a few years before or after they praise the same thing on a foreign car. Hell, they even chose the slowest, poorest performing car of the group in their pocket rocket comparo (RSX) when the comparo was supposed to be just about performance (at least how I interpreted it). In one article they brag about the fuel economy of some foreign car and ignore the HP rating but for the American car instead of pointing out it gets better gas mileage with about the same or better HP the only thing they want to point out is how the engine still uses pushrods. I've read more than one article where an American car lead almost every measurable performance catagory but the foreign car still was better because it somehow felt better going slower. I guess the nicer switch gear really makes it so much better even though it didn't perform as well. It just seems like the bend every comparo however they need to so they can name the winner they feel like naming.

I've had the pleasure of getting to drive all kinds of cars through rental agencies. At one point I rented a different car each month for 15 months straight. We're talking 30 day rentals here, not a couple of days. I just don't see where many of the Japanese cars are supposedly better than the American cars other than perceived quality items (gap/flushness/feel). Hell, two of the biggest piles of crap I drove where Toyota Corollas and Hyundai Accents. Blah!

It's funny this came up now. It's time for me to renew my MT subscription. My next issue will be my last after about 10 straight years. I have no intention of renewing. I got my new MT last night. I spent about 10 minutes glancing through it and it probably won't get looked at again before throwing it away. Pure garbage.

Don't worry about the Car of the Year award. If you look up what cars have gotten it, you'd be pretty surprised. Vega, Monza, K-car, etcYou forgot about the 1983 Renault Alliance! That was also a car of the year winner. My parents bought a 3 year old one for me when I was in high school. Biggest pile of **** I've ever owned!

I am curious. Do people regularly rest their hands and or for some reason pet their dashboard. I think I touch it to dust it, and use it as a resting spot for gloves or singlasses overnight. That's about it.

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/roadtests/firstdrive/2006/honda.civic.si/06.honda.civic.si.torque.500.jpg
This kills me. THe Si and RSX-S dont even hit 140 ft/lbs of torque and the second v-tech doesn't kick in untill 6,000 rpm. For an indy car, this power band might be great, but how could you drive this everyday on the street? You have to beat the poo out of it just to maintain a decent pace.

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/roadtests/firstdrive/2006/honda.civic.si/06.honda.civic.si.torque.500.jpg
This kills me. THe Si and RSX-S dont even hit 140 ft/lbs of torque and the second v-tech doesn't kick in untill 6,000 rpm. For an indy car, this power band might be great, but how could you drive this everyday on the street? You have to beat the poo out of it just to maintain a decent pace.

Actually you can maintain a decent pace by just driving it normal. Just because there's 140 ft/lbs of torque that high doesn't mean you'll need all of it for normal driving. You'll get along fine with just staying in the 3K and less range. If you need that extra power it'll be there... Dyno sheets have absolutely no reflection on the daily drivability of a car.

Also don't forget that reving to 6K RPM in a sport compact 4 cylinder isn't as much of a chore to do as it is in a V8 muscle car. They get there considerabley quicker and with less effort.

Care to tell me where about's you wore that paint off? I just don't see anything painted inside the interior of my truck -- it's all the molded stuff; fairly soft & flexible. I guess I'm missing it. Again -- all three vehicles I know of haven't had a problem -- so I'm curious to see what place on the truck experiences enough hand-traffic that I can't see it even though it must be a frequented part (enough to wear the supposed paint off).

Lastly, I'm going to have to take your word for the sandpaper bit -- there's NO WAY in #*$Y# that I'm going to take sandpaper to my dash. Call me crazy, but I tend to treat my vehicles a bit better than that.

My worst greviance against Road and Track is their crapy times!!

They can't get a Z06 into the 11's and they just test a GTO--400hp and a 13.7??>? Yeah right!:rolleyes:

M/Ts not great but they usually have a car in the mag that I want to read about, so I buy it:p

R&T times are what you can expect to realistically get.

The other magazines use whatever trick works from severe brake torques to neutral drops on automatics to clutch abuse (stuff you would NEVER do to your own actual "I'm-paying-on-for-the-next-5-years" car while it's still under warranty), then averages the times.


On the subject of car rags, I also liked Motor Trend when I was back in High School. The 1st Car & Driver I bought (and still have :D) is the "Double the Double Nickel" article (April 78 I think) which won me over. To me it was the best written most fun to read article I'd seen at that time.

Today, I read Car & Driver periodically, but still way more than I read Motor Trend. I like Automobile, but they don't have the edge and humor C&D has. I'm quickly becoming a fan of MPH, though.

Of all the car mags, Road & Track is without a doubt the best as far as being balenced, informative, and free from ridiculous stances or bias.

I am pretty sure Car and Driver does nothing to abuse the cars when they test them either. They went over their methods a few years ago, and they seemed pretty much like the motor trend methods. I think C&Ds are SAE corrected though, although I thought Motor Trend's were as well. I can guarantee C&D isn't neutral dropping any trannies to get their times. A well driven 05 GTO will run 12s without abusing the hell out of it, and likewise a z06 most likely will run 11s. The guys who abuse the hell out of them are just looking for those last few tenths.

I am pretty sure Car and Driver does nothing to abuse the cars when they test them either. They went over their methods a few years ago, and they seemed pretty much like the motor trend methods. I think C&Ds are SAE corrected though, although I thought Motor Trend's were as well. I can guarantee C&D isn't neutral dropping any trannies to get their times. A well driven 05 GTO will run 12s without abusing the hell out of it, and likewise a z06 most likely will run 11s. The guys who abuse the hell out of them are just looking for those last few tenths.

Agreed. I am quite sure nuetral drop wouild do nothing get the car to go faster. If R/T gets realistic times, then do other mags get unrealistc times??

Times that you cannot expect to get yourself.

Car and Driver does not powershift either.

I have beat some magazine times and I am just one man--not a test car driver.

I don't think any of the "big 4" do abusive techniques (I know CandD and R&T do not). One big difference for Road & Track though is that they do not correct for weather/altitude at all. What they run is what they publish. Which means it is basically only good to compare cars they run on the same day.

I think that partially explains why their acceleration results are sometimes considerably slower (their slow times are my main beef with them too).

BTW, wireless is great! I'm typing this from the terminal at Portland Int'l Airport, waiting to get on my plane. :cool:

Interesting to see I'm not the only person who has been less and less impressed with C&D and MT over time, and am starting to like R&T more and more, despite crappy times.