[sykboy]

Mazda is ford, now too.

I should probably note that my last post was meant to be sarcastic. All the mags seem to let out some anti-american bias at times. Sometimes is just isn't so obvious. It isn't that they pick non american cars, the competition is good, it is how they go about it.

 

[patentmike]

At least they didn't say it looks like a Mustang with cleaned up side and a Sunfire grill, which is what I thought the first time I saw it.

 

[MaxLegroom]

Pardon me, but are you talking about the same Car and Driver that put the SRX as the winner of a recent SUV comparison?

Also, aren't the things they criticized mostly the same things that have been discussed either here or on UlitmateGTO.com? It almost seems to me as if Car and Driver read our comments, and then used them to write their road test.

 

[69nova]

I scanned through C and D yesterday. They also had an article on the Impala which was fair in my mind. They gave it good reviews but also said that it is no BMW. They also said that with the rebates, the car was a good buy.

 

[SmallBlock]

Hudson,

In Car & Driver's case, it is all about the semantics. It is all about their writing style. The article on the SRX (as mentioned previously) is case in point. The Mercedes and the SRX both had sophisticated navigation/entertainment systems, yet the Mercedes is deemed interesting, while the Cadillac is termed "electronic hoo-hah". We can thank Mr. Lutz for bringing this to our attention. As you proceed through the entire comparison (or any other comparison), you are imparted with the general feeling that the evaluators are BEGRUDGINGLY giving the Cadillac its due.

With Car and Driver, every little point of recognition must be earned thrice over by a domestic manufacturer. Once to warrant mention. Twice to warrant condescending praise. Three times to earn unpostured accolade. This same outlook does not seem to apply with any imported vehicle.

In today's day and age, where everything has "spin", we the consumer have become much more sensitive to it. As such, its not very hard to identify when something is being "spun". The last two years have seen a greater amount of imported "Spin" creep into C&D's writing style.

Although they are journalists, then should at least attempt to be what they purport to be. Objective vehicle evaluators.

But the bigger question is: WHY ARE THEY DOING IT? (Ad money, Ann Arbor self-hatred, why?)

 

[69nova]

Boy, when you look at the articles and read the inuendos, I guess it does make a difference.
I know that many members on this site are more familiar with cars so they read past them. I know that I look for the really technical stuff (like gear trains, etc.) which one almost never sees. So, to somebody not very technically oriented in nature, those little phrases mean a lot. Especially when you consider that Mercedes' lower level cars have taken a quality beating yet people still think of them as the last word.

good point.

 

[sykboy]

Originally posted by MaxLegroom@Nov 14 2003, 04:29 AM
Pardon me, but are you talking about the same Car and Driver that put the SRX as the winner of a recent SUV comparison?

Also, aren't the things they criticized mostly the same things that have been discussed either here or on UlitmateGTO.com? It almost seems to me as if Car and Driver read our comments, and then used them to write their road test.

No, not that article. The SUV of the year where the SRX is slammed throughout ... HEY! WAIT! I f'd up! :lol: It was MOTOR TRENDs SUV of the year! My mistake. The bell rings true, none the less. The VW Toureg("Whore-eeg" I believe is the correct pronounciation :huh: ) beat the SRX which C&D picked first. The VW got LAST in that one.

Sorry C&D!...that felt weird.

Anyway, they aren't completely innocent of this either. I wll try not to lump them in together anymore, though, IMO. Maybe to a lesser degree. I am going to try to be more aware of who is writing what.

 

[mason]

I'll be glad when all of the magazines stop digging up old junk from the 1980's like Cadillac's Cimmaron, just so they can get a little jab in at GM.

 

[69nova]

In comparison to hum drum cars like any Toyotas or the Honda Accord, the GTO is not that bad style-wise.
I had to step back and re-think this subject.
The older GTO devotees are being too hard on the new vehicle. But, if asked to compare it to the other manufacturers, it is equal to most of them for the price range and category.
Also, the car mags are doing the same thing.

 

[nsap]

Originally posted by 69nova@Nov 17 2003, 12:21 PM
In comparison to hum drum cars like any Toyotas or the Honda Accord, the GTO is not that bad style-wise.
I had to step back and re-think this subject.
The older GTO devotees are being too hard on the new vehicle. But, if asked to compare it to the other manufacturers, it is equal to most of them for the price range and category.
Also, the car mags are doing the same thing.

Those retro devotees need to get with the times!!! It is nearly 2004! Not 1968!~ :lol:

 

[Canuck]

They could have designed a Modern GTO around the principles the past ones maintained (well... except the 74):
So TAfreak the 73 GTO would be a great basis for a Modern GTO?
I have an Fbody and yes it is a fun car but the GTO is much better interpretation of where Pontiac needs to be. Also having a useful backseat makes the GTO great if you ever have more than one passenger. I personally don't want a sedan until I have to have one.

 

[69nova]

The getting with the times is measured on how much profit GM can turn. And this is reflected on money saved on the assembly line.
I, too, am a devotee of the 64 GTO but everybody must recognize that GM cannot put a car on the street without the pollution equipment, the users' safety fetures and better handling. Yeah, I look under the hood of any 60's vehicle and see only the bare necessities of getting the motor rumbling. A PCV and crank case tube into the air filter. Oxygen sensors? The only thing that was sensed was the water temp, oil pressure and amps. So, the engineers now have a more difficult time packaging the car just to meet the gov't specs.
So, how easily can it be assembled and how many parts go in it?
The radio in my 2004 Monte Carlo does 100 times the jobs as the old radios (the salesman took 1/2 hour explaining everything). while he was talking, I was wondering what polish to use and looking at the gauges.
BUT, aside from all the technological advantages (fuel injection, by the way, beats carburetion unless you like to tinker), the body of the 64 was good looking then and turns heads now.

 

[chadbarb99]

I also have read that GM will sell 18,000 GTO's a year (this I knew), but then I cringed when I saw for 3 years and after that who knows. I thought a new redesigned version was coming out for 2007. Whats the word on all of this??

 

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally posted by chadbarb99@Nov 19 2003, 09:17 AM
I also have read that GM will sell 18,000 GTO's a year (this I knew), but then I cringed when I saw for 3 years and after that who knows. I thought a new redesigned version was coming out for 2007. Whats the word on all of this??

2004..2005...2006 Thats 3 years to me.

07 would make it the 4th year and will be build off the Sigma-Mass chassis... or whatever its called, VE, Sigma Mass, Sigma Lite, Lil'Sigma, Mini Sigma, Snoop Siggy Sigma, etc...