dont trust motor trend mag

[svtsilversnake]

i was reading an artical in either road and track or car and driver. i cant remember but they did the cobra vs camaro. and the linginfelter z06, bugatti veyrion, hennessy viper and one other. but the horse power rating wasnt correct on the z06 . know its possible they were reffering to rear wheel figures.but the 0-60 was way off by a full sec. i have read up on the new ones and its supposed to be a solid 1.8 sec. which is hauling balls. i know typos arnt out of the question but they did the same thing with themustang vs camaro. the mustang supposidly did it in 5.5 sec yet i can consistantly hit it just under or in 5 sec and i highly dought that mine is somehow more special than the one they tested(i also didnt have my cai when i timed it.just exaust...........im outage breath

[nckissfan]

magazines test the cars, and their data may be different from yours due to weather conditions, road surface, drivers ability, etc.

[RF Cobra]

The Car and Driver guys just need to retire. I gave up on them after they started referring to anything that was sporty, a muscle car, and not an import, as uncomfortable, cramped etc. They all often make mistakes in their articles and nothing is worse than trying to discuss a topic when the other person is using incorrect info they obtained from reading a magazine article and think it is infallable fact.

[svtsilversnake]

The Car and Driver guys just need to retire. I gave up on them after they started referring to anything that was sporty, a muscle car, and not an import, as uncomfortable, cramped etc. They all often make mistakes in their articles and nothing is worse than trying to discuss a topic when the other person is using incorrect info they obtained from reading a magazine article and think it is infallable fact.
i couldnt agree more

[Bartman01]

The magazines can only report their actual results. Lots of things can factor in to their times:
Weather
Specific vehicle
Driver
Tires (and their condition)
Condition of clutch
Track
And so on...
There is no reason to suspect that they are lying, if anything they were probably testing in less than ideal conditions or had a bad driver/vehicle.

On the horsepower - it could have been a simple typo/oversight. While C&D is 'generally' accurate they do make mistakes. Some are due to ignorance, some are just mistakes that slipped through. Anyone who bases their 'facts' on one article from one magazine is not worth arguing with.

As to comments on American cars. Sorry, but many American cars ARE crap. Their interiors are generally made of cheap materials that are poorly constructed. You have to remember that they spend their days driven all different types of vehicles, and once you get used to a 'nice' interior it is difficult to praise a low quality one. I have seen the same comments made of many imports as well.

[5.0L GT]

I have a subscription to C/D and MT, every month it's like I'm reading either one a second time, they both test the same cars every month, although the accuracy of the info may differ between the two, I like C/D due to it's sometimes humorous test of various anomolies on and off road. I don't think I'll renew my MT subscription, but I'll keep C/D.

[mus6870]

Most car magazines are like politicians,they only tell you there side of the story.The one I still get is Autoweek.They seem to be informative,unbiased,ahead of the pack and sometimes humorous.Check them for yourself and see. :)

[silversvo]

i was reading an artical in either road and track or car and driver. i cant remember but they did the cobra vs camaro. and the linginfelter z06, bugatti veyrion, hennessy viper and one other. but the horse power rating wasnt correct on the z06 . know its possible they were reffering to rear wheel figures.but the 0-60 was way off by a full sec. i have read up on the new ones and its supposed to be a solid 1.8 sec. which is hauling balls. i know typos arnt out of the question but they did the same thing with themustang vs camaro. the mustang supposidly did it in 5.5 sec yet i can consistantly hit it just under or in 5 sec and i highly dought that mine is somehow more special than the one they tested(i also didnt have my cai when i timed it.just exaust...........im outage breath

I am a true believer that the magazine are wrong lot of the times as I have been drag racing motorcycles since I was 13 and I jumped on a guys yamaha R1 and ran a better time than the magazine article I have said the bike would go. Of course, the magazine had two runs on it which is the test run and then the correct run. I did two runs and beat both times. It has a lot to do with climate, rider/driver, road surface, temperature, tire presuures, ect....

[ckmk28]

I used to subscribe, but it seems like they spend all there time on SUVs. They are not as well rounded as they were several years ago.

[rleard]

A funny fact if you ask a fox how may hens are left in the hen house, he will always tell you how many are remaning.
Suvs at one time were called station wagons. I must admit I think car mags. and comic strips have alot in common.
If you take all the conditions of making a test, temps air , track temp, Rh, driver condition, tire conditions, engine temps and the list goes on and on.
Heres something to think about
#1 cabs, #1 county, state,federal cars, #1 limos #1 5 star cars. They are all Fords #1 longes lasting car Merk (fluffy crown vic ) But the writers come up with all the bs's of there pick. Also advertising dollars in there mag, will sway things, or where the $$$'s hit the road
Data is data only if the base line is the same, writers, write /or wrong, to sell stories. :thumbsup:
1 Explorer, 1 Ranger, 2 mustangs, 1 Lincoln 1 Merk Maq,1 Comet 1 Contienetal mkll and 1 chevy 31.

[ProfChaos]

As to comments on American cars. Sorry, but many American cars ARE crap. Their interiors are generally made of cheap materials that are poorly constructed. You have to remember that they spend their days driven all different types of vehicles, and once you get used to a 'nice' interior it is difficult to praise a low quality one. I have seen the same comments made of many imports as well.


That's a good point. (With the exception of carefully groomed garage queens, is there really any '93-'98 SVT Cobra that hasn't seen serious deterioration in the leather? GM leather is even worse, much to the chagrin of those who paid big biscuits for a C-5 Corvette.) Even so, both Motor Trend and Car and Driver might do a better job in reviews of distinguishing between the basic function/utilitarian aspects of individual cars. After all, the person interested in buying a BMW M6 would not likely also be interested in buying a Shelby GT500: the two cars are of entirely different breeds, even though both might have their strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes, the reviewers in those two magazines remind me more of whiny brats than they remind me of objective authorities on automotive engineering.