I am done with Car and Driver Magazine
.
01-02-09, 08:36 PM
#32
I agree and stated that in my previous post...
I have no problem admitting that BMW is still the performance king but C&D needs to stop pretending that they are the only real deal and everything else are poseurs. Just because other manufactures have other ideas about how to make a sports sedan doesn't make them poseurs, if that's the case then why don't they just pack up, go home and let BMW have it all. I don't know about you but I sure don't want a Lexus 3-series...
Last edited by ffpowerLN; 01-02-09 at 08:44 PM.
01-02-09, 09:21 PM
#33
Pole Position
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: LV 426
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-02-09, 10:22 PM
#34
Lexus Champion
01-02-09, 11:02 PM
#35
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
I don't follow your logic. The BMW M3 deservies most all of the praise it recieves. Of course it's not as "fast" as the Nissan GT-R, but as was said above, there is more to a car than performance numbers. The M3 has more soul behind the wheel. Class benchmark, bar none. Lexus, BMW, Audi, Nissan - The BMW M3 (and Porsche 911) are still the cars to beat. Nissan did a hell of a job still. Others will have different opinions. BMW is not a company that you can easily say deserves no credit for most always setting the bar for how a car should drive. Steering feel, feedback, tracking, understeer, road feel. BMW does this right, it really cannot be argued. It's obvious that C&D comes to these comparisons with performance as their overreaching decision factor.
I personally like C&D, I like the comparison tests, even as I've disagreed many, many times. The pictures are great, the commentary is entertaining, and really, it's great to sit back and relax with any car mag, frusterating or not
I personally like C&D, I like the comparison tests, even as I've disagreed many, many times. The pictures are great, the commentary is entertaining, and really, it's great to sit back and relax with any car mag, frusterating or not
yes I agree that the BMW is an amazing machine and anyone who tried to argue that is ignorant, BUT its not faster than a GTR and a major automotive publication should not lie and say that the M3 "dispatched " a GTR.
I will read anything on cars I can get my hands on , but I am no longer picking up Car and Driver.
01-02-09, 11:07 PM
#36
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
There are reasons why auto magazines often choose BMW's over their competitiors. While Bimmers are not always the fastest cars in their category, or the best-built from a reliability standpoint, they have power- steering systems, chassis dynamics, and brakes, that, IMO, are some of the best on the market. BMW chassis engineers, for example, have an almost magical ability to combine sharp handling with an at least acceptably smooth ride (even on the stiffer-sprung, lower-tire-profile Sport packages). The brake pedals have NO sponginess, instant response, effective deceleration, and, thankfully, lack the annoying dragging sensation that Mercedes brakes often have when you lift your foot of the pedal. And the steering-feel has to be sampled to be believed. IMO, it is simply THE best among production sedans, coupes, and SUVs. You can almost steer a BMW blindfolded, just from the feel of the tires and steering gear alone. The only major BMW shortcoming, as I see it (besides the Bangle-inspired designs and the unreliability of some models), is the annoying, complex I-Drive.....a real pain in the a** when you are trying to drive. Even non-nav, non-I-Drive BMWs tend to have complex dash controls.
So, you may not agree with the way that car mags seem to often pick BMWs over their competitors, but it is often done for a good reason.....and not just BMW's advertising money. BMW is not the classic driver-enthusiast brand it is for nothing....they have earned many of the ratings they got. Other cars may offer better quality, better acceleration, more space efficnency, slicker paint jobs, lower prices, better warranties.......any one of a number of things, but, for simple driving pleasure, it's hard to beat a Bimmer, though, I agree that they are not the cars for everybody. I, myself, like Subarus.
So, you may not agree with the way that car mags seem to often pick BMWs over their competitors, but it is often done for a good reason.....and not just BMW's advertising money. BMW is not the classic driver-enthusiast brand it is for nothing....they have earned many of the ratings they got. Other cars may offer better quality, better acceleration, more space efficnency, slicker paint jobs, lower prices, better warranties.......any one of a number of things, but, for simple driving pleasure, it's hard to beat a Bimmer, though, I agree that they are not the cars for everybody. I, myself, like Subarus.
01-02-09, 11:10 PM
#37
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
01-02-09, 11:32 PM
#38
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not that Lexus has another "idea" of how to build a sports sedan. Every Lexus from the IS, GS, and LS are simply inferior on the sports part to the BMW competition, this cannot be argued. Light vauge steering is the biggest culprit. BMW has managed to incorporate expert ride quality with dynamic handling capabilities, Lexus hasn't. If you think sports sedans are supposed to offer half-par driving levels, I can't change your mind, but as far as I see it, Lexus should be doing better, much better, if they are truly a "tier one" luxury performance automaker who wish to compete with their German foes, the ones who are at the top of that "endless persuit of perfection" pedestal they are out to conquer. Oh, and I completely disagree that BMWs somehow have "cheap" interiors, or that Lexus cars somehow wipe the slate clean whenever it comes to build quality. The BMWs may be cold, but they are far away from being cheap. I personally think Toyota should be injecting a lot more character into their cars, espcially the interiors. They are able to get away with it with the IS and GS maybe, but there's a reason the LS fails to compete with it's German competition on most every level excluding price.
01-03-09, 12:05 AM
#40
Out of Warranty
It's been said that politicians and diapers should be changed often, and for the same reason. I would extend the metaphor to automotive journalists, particularly those at C/D. They, along with practically every automotive writer has long since lost touch with the real world of automobile ownership, not to mention you and me. In my world, I don't drive six or eight cars a month, all of them brand new. I have to live with a car for a number of years, so not only do I get to know it, I must restrain my choices to 1.) my budget, and 2.) my practical reality.
I subscribed to Sports Car Illustrated from the dim age before I had a driver's license, and when it morphed into C/D, I was stung. SCI boasted the finest stable of automotive journalists under one roof - they were literate, entertaining, and knowledgeable, as well as being just enough out of the main stream to attract a rebellious teen like me. C/D brought in a new generation of journalists, raised in the tradition of Ken Purdy, who were poets first, engineers second, and enthusiasts at all times.
About fifteen years ago, after a absence from the pages of the magazine for a few years, I picked up a few copies in a vain search for the brand of entertainment once found there. It was gone. C/D had morphed once again in my absence into a group of number geeks that ignored the passion of the automobile for acceleration times, braking distances, and slalom numbers. With the departure of David E. Davis, I lost all hope. The magazine had become the habitat of a handful fo hopeless fanboys that knew nothing of the soul of the automobile. It had become an appliance for going fast and nothing else.
To me at least, the automotive experience is more than a set of performance numbers. Is it really important that the car will top 160 mph, or slice an apex at over 1G? How many times will I be using those features in my car's lifetime? Enough of this "just knowing it will do it" stuff, what good is performance you can't possibly use in the real world? If I'm going racing, I'll build up a track car, but if I'm going to hit the Interstate or the two-lane blacktop for a few hours of entertainment and/or new horizons, I don't want to pay the toll for at-the-limit handling enforced by a minimally-compliant suspension and near-solid bushings on a long, relatively straight-line journey interspersed with tar seams and expansion joints.
By the same token, why should I accept 10 mpg, a massive amount of heat transfer through the firewall and floorboards, and the drone of sill-mounted exhausts to tool along at 75 in a vehicle designed for the Nurburgring? I think not. I overcame my teenage fantasies of driving the Mille Miglia after a couple mid-winter weeks with an Austin-Healey 100. A Renault R-4 taught me that although its racing line was laughable, it was possible to cover long distances at rally speed in a modicum of comfort. OK, it rolled over on its door handles on turn-in and looked like a poodle passing a fire hydrant whenever it met an apex, with one rear wheel hiked well into the air and tiny 13" tires screaming for mercy. It got you there, the top didn't leak, my spine was still where it was when installed by the Factory, and despite the comical handling and raspberry exhaust note, it brought home a few trophies.
I discovered that car magazines not only represent a fantasy world where there is no luggage and long stretches of Interstate must be dispatched without fuss at the turn of a key, they have a total disconnect with reality. The automotive writers don't actually have to OWN the cars. Something goes wrong, they call the office and some lackey comes out and handles the problem while the writer is whisked away in another factory loaner. They don't deal with the miserable tire wear because after a few turns on the drag strip, track, or burnout circle, they flip the keys to the smoldering heap to someone else - either an intern or a flack for the manufacturer and walk away. They take a car with maybe a hundred miles on the clock to the track and push it for all its worth. I pity the "first" owner of that car who will be dealing with scuffed cylinder walls, warped rotors, and a slipping transmission for the next few years.
Today's automotive journalists don't own cars for three or four years. They don't come to know their personalities in three or four days after being carefully groomed and prepared for their close-up by the factory. They seldom deal with recalcitrant service departments, or ignorant mechanics. Despite having purchased a series of automobiles over the years based on C/D's advice, the magazine no longer represent me or my automotive needs. I'm through with car magazines altogether - they can feed the next generation's fantasies, not mine.
I subscribed to Sports Car Illustrated from the dim age before I had a driver's license, and when it morphed into C/D, I was stung. SCI boasted the finest stable of automotive journalists under one roof - they were literate, entertaining, and knowledgeable, as well as being just enough out of the main stream to attract a rebellious teen like me. C/D brought in a new generation of journalists, raised in the tradition of Ken Purdy, who were poets first, engineers second, and enthusiasts at all times.
About fifteen years ago, after a absence from the pages of the magazine for a few years, I picked up a few copies in a vain search for the brand of entertainment once found there. It was gone. C/D had morphed once again in my absence into a group of number geeks that ignored the passion of the automobile for acceleration times, braking distances, and slalom numbers. With the departure of David E. Davis, I lost all hope. The magazine had become the habitat of a handful fo hopeless fanboys that knew nothing of the soul of the automobile. It had become an appliance for going fast and nothing else.
To me at least, the automotive experience is more than a set of performance numbers. Is it really important that the car will top 160 mph, or slice an apex at over 1G? How many times will I be using those features in my car's lifetime? Enough of this "just knowing it will do it" stuff, what good is performance you can't possibly use in the real world? If I'm going racing, I'll build up a track car, but if I'm going to hit the Interstate or the two-lane blacktop for a few hours of entertainment and/or new horizons, I don't want to pay the toll for at-the-limit handling enforced by a minimally-compliant suspension and near-solid bushings on a long, relatively straight-line journey interspersed with tar seams and expansion joints.
By the same token, why should I accept 10 mpg, a massive amount of heat transfer through the firewall and floorboards, and the drone of sill-mounted exhausts to tool along at 75 in a vehicle designed for the Nurburgring? I think not. I overcame my teenage fantasies of driving the Mille Miglia after a couple mid-winter weeks with an Austin-Healey 100. A Renault R-4 taught me that although its racing line was laughable, it was possible to cover long distances at rally speed in a modicum of comfort. OK, it rolled over on its door handles on turn-in and looked like a poodle passing a fire hydrant whenever it met an apex, with one rear wheel hiked well into the air and tiny 13" tires screaming for mercy. It got you there, the top didn't leak, my spine was still where it was when installed by the Factory, and despite the comical handling and raspberry exhaust note, it brought home a few trophies.
I discovered that car magazines not only represent a fantasy world where there is no luggage and long stretches of Interstate must be dispatched without fuss at the turn of a key, they have a total disconnect with reality. The automotive writers don't actually have to OWN the cars. Something goes wrong, they call the office and some lackey comes out and handles the problem while the writer is whisked away in another factory loaner. They don't deal with the miserable tire wear because after a few turns on the drag strip, track, or burnout circle, they flip the keys to the smoldering heap to someone else - either an intern or a flack for the manufacturer and walk away. They take a car with maybe a hundred miles on the clock to the track and push it for all its worth. I pity the "first" owner of that car who will be dealing with scuffed cylinder walls, warped rotors, and a slipping transmission for the next few years.
Today's automotive journalists don't own cars for three or four years. They don't come to know their personalities in three or four days after being carefully groomed and prepared for their close-up by the factory. They seldom deal with recalcitrant service departments, or ignorant mechanics. Despite having purchased a series of automobiles over the years based on C/D's advice, the magazine no longer represent me or my automotive needs. I'm through with car magazines altogether - they can feed the next generation's fantasies, not mine.
Last edited by Lil4X; 01-03-09 at 05:52 AM.
01-03-09, 10:08 AM
#41
The above quote really hits the nail on the head. When my car failed or had an "electrical problem" on the way to the mall I can't just say something like... Well the car did get me to the mall last week so let me just pretend that nothing is wrong here.
01-03-09, 04:42 PM
#42
Lexus Fanatic
I discovered that car magazines not only represent a fantasy world where there is no luggage and long stretches of Interstate must be dispatched without fuss at the turn of a key, they have a total disconnect with reality. The automotive writers don't actually have to OWN the cars. Something goes wrong, they call the office and some lackey comes out and handles the problem while the writer is whisked away in another factory loaner. They don't deal with the miserable tire wear because after a few turns on the drag strip, track, or burnout circle, they flip the keys to the smoldering heap to someone else - either an intern or a flack for the manufacturer and walk away. They take a car with maybe a hundred miles on the clock to the track and push it for all its worth. I pity the "first" owner of that car who will be dealing with scuffed cylinder walls, warped rotors, and a slipping transmission for the next few years.
Today's automotive journalists don't own cars for three or four years. They don't come to know their personalities in three or four days after being carefully groomed and prepared for their close-up by the factory. They seldom deal with recalcitrant service departments, or ignorant mechanics.
Today's automotive journalists don't own cars for three or four years. They don't come to know their personalities in three or four days after being carefully groomed and prepared for their close-up by the factory. They seldom deal with recalcitrant service departments, or ignorant mechanics.
On the long-trip road tests, (where they drive the SUV's up to the Arctic Circle, for instance, or down the Baja Peninisula), they often have to rely on the local service, too, just like you or I would.
01-03-09, 05:06 PM
#43
Close, Lil, but no cigar.......that's not quite so. It is true that the cars they have for comparisons, first drives, and road tests are usually kept only a few days, or a week at most, but that's not true in a number of cases. On the long-term/Four Seasons tests, they typically keep a vehicle for 50,000 miles for long-term durability/wear tests, and on those cars, they usually have to deal with the closest dealership (or the dealership of their choice) just like the average customer would. And they often have gripes with how the local dealerships treat them or charge them for warranty work or routine service....the fact that they are part of the auto press often makes no difference.
On the long-trip road tests, (where they drive the SUV's up to the Arctic Circle, for instance, or down the Baja Peninisula), they often have to rely on the local service, too, just like you or I would.
On the long-trip road tests, (where they drive the SUV's up to the Arctic Circle, for instance, or down the Baja Peninisula), they often have to rely on the local service, too, just like you or I would.
When making a call about what car is first and what car is second, third, etc...they make that judgment based on maybe a week of driving a brand new, manufacturer approved and chosen vehicle. A week with one car returns only a small snapshot of data, most of which is in the form of hard numbers. Long term things like comfort, reliability, repair costs, overall satisfaction, and other factors are NOT factored into these tests but they DO matter to buyers. If everyone made a purchase decision based on C&D or Motor Trend Lexus would be out of business, but surprise surprise...they outsell BMW, the darling of the press. What does that imply?
Long term tests are tucked near the back amongst the ads for cargo liners and car covers and are rarely ever mentioned or probably read. I, for one, do take a look at them when I pick up a mag but also know what Lil4x's post is talking about and whole heartedly agree.
01-03-09, 05:10 PM
#44
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: California
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how many percent of those Car and Driver editors are driving or plan to buy a 3-series, since they think it is the best car in the whole world. C&D editors are biased to the point as if they are even proud of having that bias. Still, I enjoy their pictures and other comparisons with no 3-series involving.
01-03-09, 05:15 PM
#45
Lexus Fanatic
Long term tests are tucked near the back amongst the ads for cargo liners and car covers and are rarely ever mentioned or probably read. I, for one, do take a look at them when I pick up a mag but also know what Lil4x's post is talking about and whole heartedly agree.
In fact, the Four Seasons long-term tests are one good way of verifying, at least on a small scale, what Consumer Reports has to say about a car model's reliability.