Do motoring journalists actually drive the cars they review?

bartelbe

The manufacturers use to take the press cars off the line and have their engineers go over them with a fine tooth comb. So the faults you might come across on the bog standard production car will never been seen by a journalist.

They also use to tune performance models before the press got them, so the one's the public got were never as fast.

WellKnownSid

bartelbe wrote: »

The manufacturers use to take the press cars off the line and have their engineers go over them with a fine tooth comb. So the faults you might come across on the bog standard production car will never been seen by a journalist.

They also use to tune performance models before the press got them, so the one's the public got were never as fast.

I think long term tests are better at revealing problems than 30 minutes of hands-on, on a runway somewhere in Surrey - but they're hardly "long term"...

"After three and a half months and having clocked up almost eighteen hundred miles, it's time to say a final farewell to our extended super-long term test car. Amazing to think that when we first picked up the car Spring was just around the corner and it's, erm, still Spring, but thankfully our long-termer has survived the trials and tribulations. We threw everything we had at it - spending up to ten minutes in traffic twice a week, whilst one weekend we even took it to B&Q. Apart from the seven trips to the dealer, four breakdowns, two recalls and the alarm going off constantly, this Volkswagen Golf has been utterly flawless."

robatwork

What is it about Golfs that the press in particular seem to adore?

Yes I get they are rock solid build, but so are most new cars now.

I am no VW basher - owned a Scirocco and Passat which were 2 of the best cars I have had. But when I had a loan Golf for a few weeks I was expecting great things and was completely underwhelmed. It was nothing other than functional inside; the ride, handling and performance were all "meh", and when I took a look at the dealer price for the one I was driving, I could have found about 15 much higher spec and more interesting cars from other manufacturers.

Don't get the Golf love in. Not even interesting to look at.

nigel-swingball

I work in this environment (on the publishing side, not PR) and the majority of this speculation is utter tosh.

Motoring journalists tend to drive cars three ways:

1 - launch event - often held in Europe (for multiple countries/and or smoother roads), these two day events offer journalists about 4-5 hours driving time in a variety of engines, specs and derivatives. A later event on UK roads often follows.

2 - short-termer - a car delivered from the mfr's press fleet to the office/home of a journalist for a week's test. More driving time, more familiar roads, proper UK spec.

3 - long termer - three months is bare minimum, more often 6 or 12.
the cars may move round staff in the office so they get a number of opinions.

thescouselander wrote: »

I'm not just talking about how they describe the drive though. For example, in the review of my own car there was criticism of the satnav screen for being small at only 5". The problem is the screen is 7.5 " across the range and you can see it's bigger than 5" just by sitting in the car. They also got the engine specification wrong as well as a number of comments other features that are not present on the car.

Test spec may vary to UK spec, but really a journalist should check. Also, spec changes very quickly, so at the time of review it may have only had a 5" screen. Guessing this is a VW group product, maybe Leon?

bartelbe wrote: »

The manufacturers use to take the press cars off the line and have their engineers go over them with a fine tooth comb. So the faults you might come across on the bog standard production car will never been seen by a journalist.

They also use to tune performance models before the press got them, so the one's the public got were never as fast.

This really isn't true. The great thing about long termers is you get to deal with all the problems. If they have been doing this, they need to try a damn sight harder!

We've seen all sorts - dodgy speedos, electronic handbrakes not applying, broken wheel bearings, faulty temperature gauges, and even the odd pre-production car. They then either go back to the press office or to a local dealer for repairs.

WellKnownSid wrote: »

I think long term tests are better at revealing problems than 30 minutes of hands-on, on a runway somewhere in Surrey - but they're hardly "long term"...

"After three and a half months and having clocked up almost eighteen hundred miles, it's time to say a final farewell to our extended super-long term test car. Amazing to think that when we first picked up the car Spring was just around the corner and it's, erm, still Spring, but thankfully our long-termer has survived the trials and tribulations. We threw everything we had at it - spending up to ten minutes in traffic twice a week, whilst one weekend we even took it to B&Q. Apart from the seven trips to the dealer, four breakdowns, two recalls and the alarm going off constantly, this Volkswagen Golf has been utterly flawless."

We'll have a car and do 6-10k every six months - others may get used less if they're less popular cars in an office with many cars.

Wake up call It will depend on the size of the publication and its access to the vehicles.

One would expect magazines such as Top Gear etc to actually review the cars, but many regional newspapers and smaller magazines will likely just rehash what the car's manufacturer tells them to make it appear like they have driven it.

True, but most regionals now take review copy from an agency. A preview may use press releases, but it's rare to badge it as a review.

As for things always doing well, generally, it's because they're good. Cars I rather liked before I started driving considerable number of vehicles a year are now much further down the list, because you see the quality and breadth of the market.

prowla

Has the Car Of The Year 2016 been announced yet?

bunyarra

As someone who has journos writing reviews, I'd like to pipe up and correct some of the tosh written here. Anyone who linked advertising to reviews would soon be out of business - I will defend my writers from anyone as long as they have done their job properly and justify what they write. Our focus is the auto business but the principle applies.

Cars can be driven for a day or a week, sometimes much longer. Far longer than a consumer test drives one before buying. Faults that occur are written about and not hidden. However, no one is identical in tastes and likes - some will hate cheap plastic surfaces but others have no problem. Manufacturers are not stupid and know this very well - cars are targeted at specific sections of the public and tailored accordingly - one of our jobs is to identify what they do, why they have done it and see if it has been done well.

There are few really bad cars anymore - the quality is so much higher than 15 years ago or even less. Given that, some are simply better screwed together, have better components and care taken in choosing the bits'n'bobs. You may hate/love the likes of BMW/VW etc. but they generally get such details spot on. Other makes have less consistent success.

Yes, my people drive the cars, yes they spend more than "10 mins going to B&Q", no they are not identical to every buyer and yes they will have opinions - it's what journalists are paid to have

Cars are as subjective as clothes and food - you take a review of M&S's cheesecake as just an guide - do the same for cars. Go drive one multiple times - see what it is like in the dark/rain. See how easy it is to drive on the motorway and in Tesco car park. This is the only real way of seeing if a car suits you. Sadly, most dealers rely on customers taking a 1/2 hour test drive then buying - hence why Youtube, Autocar and 100's of bloggers are still in the business of reviewing cars, and they (generally) are not as biased as you think (opinionated,m sure but rarely crooked).

Prothet_of_Doom

bartelbe wrote: »

The manufacturers use to take the press cars off the line and have their engineers go over them with a fine tooth comb. So the faults you might come across on the bog standard production car will never been seen by a journalist.

They also use to tune performance models before the press got them, so the one's the public got were never as fast.

Back in the 70's a motoring magazine was given a car for performance testing on one day, and they brought it back and the next day the same car was used to test the fuel economy. My mate at Longbridge was on the night shift team that swapped the engines. :rotfl:

Prothet_of_Doom

prowla wrote: »

Has the Car Of The Year 2016 been announced yet?

The Car for 2016 in my street, appear to be a 1998-2005 Mk4 astra.

There are 6 including my black 1.6 twinport sport, and my son's red 1.6 16V Club, and next door's silver 1.6 8V merit .

Who cares what a magazine editor thinks after he's been wined and dined by the best.

thescouselander

patman99 wrote: »

Well, TheScouslander, why not set up a blog and write your own reviews. You might even be able to make some money from it.

I might actually give that a go. Not sure if anyone will read it though.

Car_54

jase1 wrote: »

None of what the motoring press say has anything to do with the respective advertising budgets of the manufacturers involved. That would be a slanderous accusation.

It wouldn't. But it might be libellous.