While looks are subjective, I highly doubt you will find many people to claim the Impala's interior is better than the new Camry's. Kind of like saying since someone might like the Assteks styling better than every other vehicle in it's segment, it does not negate the fact that most people would disagree.

 

But my point is that your assessment is no better than mine as it doesn't matter squat. Objectives matter not subjectives.

 

Subjectives do matter when averaged out - there are some people that thing the Aztek, Honda Element, Scion xB, etc, etc look great, but I bet there are far more people who think they don't, and I bet it makes a noticable impact on sales.

So what you might mean to say is that subjectives are not nearly as easily quantifiable as objectives, but they DO matter.

 

As Kyle pointed out, "subjective" does have a meaningful impact. To say it does not matter is flat out wrong.

 

On that thought why is it that the Scion and Honda were forgiven, even praised for their poor looks and the Pontiac was panned universally?

No in a pure comparison one car beats another they do NOT matter. To those purchasing it does. Subjectives can easily be swayed by prior experiences to easily for them to be considered.

 

Wrong and wrong again. You are grasping here. In car comparisons, "pure" as you want to call it, function and form are both factored in, not just functionality. And prior experiences can also be considered when when comparing objectively. In GM's case, most reviewers are more critical of GM due to their past mistakes.

 

To make a 100% impartial comparison you must remove personal opinions and compare the facts. Subjectives are not facts they are opinions which can never be proven or disproven.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...ition&ct=title
Which should bear no impact on a new car. You and I both know that.

Who is grasping now?

 

If you really want to get into it, 90% of what car reviews cover these days are 'subjectives'. The characteristic of the ride, noise level, steering, chassis response, power curve, radio functionality, center stack interface, seat comfort - I mean literally... 90% of it could be deemed subjective.

Again - subjectivitity by nature varies from person to person, but human nature in and of itself is largely subjective.

I've heard LOTS of people here slam the Camry for having an ugly grill. I can see where they think that and I can see where a lot of people think that, and I can also see where that is going to lose Toyota some potential sales. It's just a 'fact' of subjectivity that the majority of a car buying decision is not based on quantified numbers, but rather emotion and preference - often times of which, the majority agrees on (ie: most people prefer a rigid chassis to a wet-noodle one, but there are still some old folks home poeple who like the waterbed chassis feel).

 

Once again, wrong. I have no idea why you actually believe you can judge cars like you described. If your twisted way of thinking actually happened, every car review would be the same from different publications. In the real world subjective opinions and like I said before, form and function play an equal role.




Actually you are the one who believes that, not me. Unfortuantly for you, in the real world, that is just not the case.


I guess I am now grasping the fact you will never get it. Carry on.

 

The drivetrain performance of the new V6 Camry is very impressive. It's right there with the V8 Impala in acceleration, yet it manages an excellent EPA mileage number (tops among all V6s I believe). The V8 Impala is also impressive in its performance and efficiency, making the new Camry all the more so. Though to be fair, the Impala really matches up better with the Avalon, size-wise. The Avalon is pretty close to the Camry though.

 

All car reviews are subjective. It's just a matter of what's important to the person doing the reviewing and how it relates to what you are after. That's why Car & Driver has the "counterpoints" section on all their car reviews. Normally, it's up to the editor to keep things from getting too far off track or falling too far int personal opinions.

I might write that the $31K G35 isn't any more impressive than a $26K Impala SS because of Impala's content, looks, performance, and value. Someone else might think the G35 is the bomb because it has better feeling leather and plastic, tighter gaps, and Infiniti's reputation and name.

If everything was subjective, Consumer Reports would be picking the same cars as best buys as Road & Track (perhaps the most subjective car magazine).