Do motoring journalists actually drive the cars they review?

Car_54

AdrianC wrote: »

Depends...

Most companies provide company cars based on lease cost - and high running costs means high lease cost, so an expensive car to run would be less likely to be available (or less "desirable", as it would "appear cheap" compared to other choices on the list).

Then, of course, there's BiK taxation, which is based on the official CO2 figure and the list price.

Exactly. I once chose a BMW as my company car as it had low BIK taxation and attractive lease cost (mainly because of good residuals). IIRC the monthly lease price for the £25k BMW was less than that for a £19k Saab.

HornetSaver

Iceweasel wrote: »

Don't tar every BMW driver with the same brush.

There are a$$holes driving all makes of car.

Fair point.

But if you can identify a car by the shape of its foglights and the sound it makes when doing '70' at a faster pace than everything else, you know it has far more than its fair share of I]fill the blank competition[/I.

Mercdriver

bunyarra wrote: »

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).

nigel-swingball wrote: »

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.



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?



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.



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.


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.

To both of you, it's quite amusing that some of my fellow correspondents don't see the irony of what they are doing. They criticise publications for making groundless statements when they themselves are lucky they didn't name manufacturers or publications or they might find themselves the wrong side of a libel writ.

There is too much rubbish talked in this forum by some posters. It's not sexy to say that publications are honest. They think that somehow they look like they know it all if they slander rather than say that they actually know jack all. The level of salt I would take with anything they say would keep Britain free of frost and ice for a century. YMMV...

jase1

Car_54 wrote: »

It wouldn't. But it might be libellous.

You can't libel an organisation.

Car_54

jase1 wrote: »

You can't libel an organisation.

You certainly can (in England). For example, McDonald's Corporation v Steel & Morris - the famous "McLibel Case".