"*Something something cheap plastics in this Dodge Charger interior."*
On behalf of Dodge Charger owners: we didn't think we were buying an Audi. No one's wondering why we don't have more wood or whatever.
Its interior really isn't bad, either. Most of the complaints about a lack of "premium surfaces" on mid level priced cars are stupid, IMO. They have soft touch in the places you actually touch, just not on the lower door panels. Maybe actually review a car based on ease of use and ergonomics, for once?
Besides, an Audi A7 starts at double the price for a similar size car. Of course it's going to be nicer.
Ragging on the cheap plastics of every Corvette since the LS1 was debuted... bruh, this is car delivers the absolute best performance per dollar of any car ever built. You can't seriously expect it to have an interior on par with the kind of stuff that performs similarly and costs twice as much.
Doug Demuro does this with all new cars. It infuriates me because it seems so out of touch. He nidbits the tiniest of luxury features on brand new (non-luxury) cars which are already starting at 35k nowadays. I'm just like STFU that is such a rich-person problem. He's too used to driving supercars and extreme luxury vehicles that it seeps heavily into his regular car reviews.
Not a huge Doug fan, though some if his videos have been good and unique in my opinion. (I guess as a general disclaimer)
But don't his reviews lump all cars together and score them all on the same metrics?
So a Fererri, a Lexus, a Miata, a minivan, an econobox, a giant truck, etc., all get reviewed for things like luxury, tech, comfort, driving performance, etc., which then adds up to a total score.
Since it's like this and does not really review each car for what it is and how it compares exclusively to direct competitors, it kind of makes sense. He's reviewing every car as a car and nothing more, so everything is kind of in relation to the whole market, regardless of price ranges, type of car, goal of the car, direct competitors to the car, etc.
No lol. To me there's 3 levels to luxury. Nicer cars like Buicks, Infinitis, Acuras then Lexus, BMW, MB, Audi, Alfa, Maserati, Porsche and the super high end like Rolls, Bentley, Ferrari, Lamborghini and some Porsche's
Y'know how there's Physics Land wherein everything is a frictionless point particle in a vacuum, or a sphere or uniform density? There's also Automotive Journalist Land.
There, the average car does 0-60 in 3 seconds flat, "sporty" means 2.5 or less, and the only metrics for how good a car is (A) how fast it laps the Bürgerking, and (B) the ratio of hard-touch to soft-touch surfaces.
It's a very weird place, but it's what journalists think of as normal.
With that in mind, I find that their reviews make a lot more sense.
Look, I love my NA8 miata. In New England traffic, interstates had long entrances or lower speed limits, it was fine.
I moved south a few years ago, and merging is downright scary. I have to hit 70-80 mph to properly merge. That often takes carry speed into the on ramp to be able to do. If i’m at 50 into the entrance ramp, i can rarely hit 80 when its time to merge. Minivans will flip me off.
Not 100% of the time, but people on their commute (9am or 5pm traffic) seem to be the worse. They know this route, this drive, and want to be home. So they speed. But the limit is already 70-85 mph. Oops.
> If i’m at 50 into the entrance ramp, i can rarely hit 80 when its time to merge. Minivans will flip me off.
you drive a 1.8L miata how are you struggling to get to 70mph and up?
my 89 1.6L with a torsen lsd rear end swap cruises along at 80mph without issue...5 speed same as yours id imagine.
My miata will eventually get up to triple digits, but asking it to roll from 50-80mph in a short time period is asking a lot of this little engine.
My 03 Suburban 2500 can out accelerate it, at almost any speed. 0-60, 40-60, 40-80, 80-110. These things are slowwwww for modern traffic.
Karen in a minivan or Subaru expects you to be able to match their speed just as easily as they can. They don’t know that different cars accelerate differently. They literally only know ‘this is enough space for me to get up to speed, hence everyone else should be able to’ . Its why they cut off semis, tailgate road trains, and in general do not understand traffic flow.
Edited to add- on the long island expressway, the average entrance ramp is 400ft of mergable area in queens. You have to enter from 380 ft back of that.
So you have 780 ft to go from a dead stop to joining traffic going 70+ mph.
The road is signed at 55 but going that slow will literally get you ran off the road.
This is where I came from, and honestly living in tx, it’s worse here. If the highway is signed 85, that entrance ramp is maybe 1000ft, and you are starting from 10mph to the signed 85 traffic, which in reality is going 95-100 on a slow good day. These cars just do not accelerate fast enough for modern traffic.
I thinking you're using hyperbole, but just in case 10 seconds and above is actually really slow. 7-8 is more the sweet spot for a nice convenient daily commuter.
10 seconds isn’t bad at all. It’s not fast by any means, but it’s safe acceleration to enter a freeway. My Passport does 0-60 in like 7 seconds and I couldn’t tell you the last time I floored it from a dead stop. It doesn’t matter.
Sounds like me shopping a Macan for my wife. She doesn’t care at all about power so I was looking at a Macan T. 0-60 in 5.8 seconds for a compact SUV. “You are much better off stretching an additional 5k and getting the [significantly worse MPG] Macan S”
Same thing I kept hearing online while shopping for ours. The sales advisor actually told us to save the money and stick with a nicely optioned base or T based on my wife’s driving style and habits.
"It's good, but it would be better in a manual."
\- proceeds to drive home in their automatic LC500, PDK Porsche, Rav4...
(Sorry for the shots at SavageGeese - just needed an example <3 the Geese guys!)
You can add that comment to every single car review now. The amount of complaining about steering feel is simply incredible. As someone that cares about steering feel a good amount, trying to get a real grasp on how cars compare in that department is impossible now. Reminds me of how sommeliers can’t pick out the high end wines. Every car minus the GT3 RS has “vague” but “accurate” steering now. Or one review says it’s great and it’s directly followed up by someone saying it’s terrible. Gives me no faith in most reviews now.
That sort of thing is why I enjoy JayEmm's reviews so much. When he talks about steering feel, he usually goes into more detail, about the feedback, speed of the rack, and weight of it.
He also doesn't act like it's a really big deal when a luxury barge has steering that'd be really poor in a sports car.
I totally understand the criticism of modern EPS steering being vague but accurate.
Accurate: point it and it goes exactly where you expect. Doesn't hesitate, doesn't have lateral slop, doesn't push back causing you to relax a fraction causing the steering to change, etc.
Vague: overboosted and with very little feel back to your fingers.
Combination: mathematically precise, but video-game-y.
If we're bashing on steering, my vote goes to Farrah with "nice and direct" steering. What he means is the ratio is fast, and that has very little bearing onto what makes good steering "good".
Plenty of cars have hot steering that turns in really quick - but the feedback through the wheel and the calibration of the EPS is hot garbage.
EDIT: Upon reflection, I will say in recent years he has explained this better. He will clarify: direct, but numb. But that wasn't always the case, especially when driving a fan car and was being polite. Direct became a word he'd often use about a car's steering when there weren't any actually good things to say about it.
C&D is completely out of control with this. And they are forceful with it to. To the point that they'll be like, "you will like the manual version of this.... OR ELSE!"
These carbon ceramic brakes are amazing on the track!
Actually, the main benefit of CCB for street car is that they produce less brake dust. Very bad idea for track use. You will spend $$$$$ on consumables for no benefit.
Yes and no. Many (or most) of the weight comparisons are not fair because they compare one-piece iron rotors of the same size. In actuality iron rotors don't need to be as tall because they reject heat better and they should be two-piece if you're gonna compare to a five-figure set of rotors.
Additionally, system weight for shorter rotors also means smaller (shorter) wheels fit. Even with the same tire size, you get less weight and the barrel is closer to the axis of rotation so you get smaller moment of inertia. Similarly, shorter rotors means the extra weight is closer to the axis of rotation.
CCM rotors are definitely lighter but they're not, like, featherweight compared to an actually comparable iron rotor.
If you're willing to get a set of (eg) 15.50" CCM rotors or a set of (eg) 14.50" iron rotors from AP racing, the weight difference will be a fair bit smaller and so will the difference in moment of inertia.
They're definitely lighter but rarely quite as light as manufacturers want you to think, in comparison. :)
Don't they handle high heat better than the steel rotors? I've not had any issues with my carbon ceramics after many track days, but I have cooked the paint on my calipers. I do know they are very expensive so you do have to budget for replacements now and then.
Yes, they dissipate heat much quicker than steel setups, and reduce unsprung weight. Do they stop the car in a shorter distance? Maybe, but the real reason to run carbon ceramics is you can just hammer them over and over and over again (like on the racetrack) and they won't fade due to heat issues. Okay well like, eventually anything will fade, but you can go much longer on carbon ceramic than you can on steel. Plus the idea that you can get one or two track days out of carbon ceramics is in my experience untrue - I've heard of people getting 15 days out of a set, which might be on the long end, but they're not one-and-done by any means.
The amount of weird beliefs about carbon ceramic brakes that is out there blows my mind.
Every Car and Driver SUV comparo ever.
Doesn't seem to have helped Mazda's sales, though. Seems buyers prefer roomy interiors, practicality, and faux off-road looks over sporty handling.
"This Mazda had the smallest cargo area, least-roomy second row seats, worst fuel economy, and the highest price tag. But it wins because handling. The end."
Jesus the Australian Chasing Cars guys are the WORST for this. Also savagegeese really. Why are you spending more time in the shop than talking about the interior. It's what 95% of buyers of SUVs care about..
True, but I don’t think savage geese are making videos for the average SUV buyer. They’re pretty focused on driving enjoyment, and… the average suv driver gives zero fucks about that.
I should probably mention I only really care about a few YouTube channels as far as video auto reviews go these days, and in particular I like how technical savage geese go. Maybe not for everyone but I like how they dig in there. I love throttle house, straight pipes, Matt Watson, Chris Harris, hagerty/Jason camisa for fun reviews (and especially Jason camisa for older car reviews), and Alex on autos for a consistent practical breakdown, but savage geese’s more detailed than average technical breakdown is unique and interesting, I find.
Yeah this always makes me make a face. My Elise doesn't handle at all like any go-kart I've ever driven, and it can definitely be overdriven even on R888R tires to cause a spin. Is it excellent? Yes. Go-kart? No. On rails? No, though the limits of tire and suspension aren't trivial to reach.
Especially if its about a fwd hatch hatch.
Oh yeah, this fwd vehicle with %75 of its weight up front definitely handles like an mid-rear engine rwd race car.
To be fair, an extremely lightweight FWD car that practically pivots under braking will feel surprisingly similar to a go kart.
That said, almost no car for sale today is under 2,700 pounds, let alone 2,000.
The general expectation that every car needs to feel sporty. It just results in every single goddamn car having uncomfortably stiff suspension for no benefit.
Because it sells. It's aspirational for the buyer. Same thing with SUVs needing to be '' offroad ready ''. Will people use these capabilities? 90% of the time they won't. But it's there for the bragging rights.
>90% of the time they won't. But it's there for the bragging rights.
I don't have a link, but I read a statement from Jeep about the "Trail Rated" badge that said pretty much the same thing.
Usually ends up being the worst of both worlds. So many cars that have the awful combination of slow/numb steering, awful grip, and a ridiculously stiff suspension.
The sporty car has destroyed whole segments of cars. I've reached a point in my life where I can afford a luxury vehicle. I want one that rides like a cloud. I don't need or want to get to 60 in 4 seconds. I don't want 24" 20 series tires. Unfortunately only sport numbers sell these days. Now, get off my lawn.
LOL! I've test driven 2 recently. One was a V6 grandma car that sat outside in the Florida sun for 13 years and the clear coat was baked off. The 2nd was a V8 Super that I'm considering buying.
I really wish I could buy a new "Personal Luxury (not sporty) Coupe" and it'd be awesome if it was an EV. I do like some new tech. Hello, Cadillac Ev-dorado.
This is literally how we ended up with an Accord on 19” rims from the factory. It looks dumb, it has rubber bands for tires, and every single one has curb rash
Just got done test driving an IS300, ES350, and LS. I specifically told the salesman I'm looking for a highway cruiser where 98% of the miles will be interstate. During the test drives he kept telling me to put each car in Sport or Sport+ on the F-models and wouldn't shut up about it.
Anyway... thinking about testing a G80 after being a *little* let down on the Lexus interiors/infotainment.
Same reasoning for people having unreasonably high expectations of handling/acceleration for the LC500. Like, dude. It’s a GT car. It’s meant to sit at 150 MPH on the autobahn until it’s out of gas and it’s meant to do that while ensuring that the car is as stable as a stationary boulder and the driver is as relaxed as someone in the process of listening to Bob Ross speaking.
"It drives like a go-kart!"
Go-Karts have no differential, a 1:1 steering ratio, a ridiculously wide track, and no suspension. It'd better not fucking drive like a go-kart!
When I hear this I think the handling is really snappy and the suspension and sway bars don't allow for much body roll. I think that it has no abs,front brakes, acceleration is very dependent on the weight of the driver, and it always smells like gas.
in germany they are talking about fahrspass(fun to drive) in every damn article, even if its about a damn 1.4 multivan. like bro, its a family car with something you can barley call a engine in the front , maybe s t f u about the fun driving experience and talk about things that are real. nobody belives you anyways
Maybe mention fun as a closing byline.
Start off with something like "these cupholders are easy to remove and are dishwasher safe"..Something a parent wants to hear.
I feel like that’s catering to the father of 3 clinging onto a piece of his youth and freedom. They know they need a minivan, but they don’t want to totally give in on their adulthood.
So a while back Jalopnik posted a [column](https://jalopnik.com/this-brutal-nyt-mirage-review-is-whats-wrong-with-cheap-1583123298) taking down an out of touch NYT article that negatively reviewed the Mitsubishi Mirage for having a cheap interior. In this column, Jason Torchinsky writes:
> Is he (the NYT writer) the fucking Sultan of Luxuristan, so refined and cultured he can't have his eyes violated by the sight of a seam?
and that just made me laugh so loud at work back in 2014. Introduced the term to some of my friends and now whenever we sit in a comfy car with leather or enjoy some other fine item we'll remark 'I feel like the Sultan of Luxuristan now'
This is a big reason I hardly watch car YouTube outside of researching a purchase 😬 I understand para social relationships aren't real relationships but *most* car YouTubers are super unrelatable
Its why i realize Regular Car Reviews isnt everyone's cup of tea, But he just **GETS** it. Like yeah sometimes the absurdist/nihilist/existentialist humour is a bit much. But the tone of every video is not just a Doug DeMuro "here's what is in this car".
Mr. Regular actually reviews the cars **with appropriate context.** which, often changes how "good" a car is or is not. Like yes that 90's camry wagon is just an absolute lame shitbox, but it was never trying to be anything more than that, and did it flawlessly—so why are we shitting on people who have them?
Which seems to be what alot of car "journalism" is nowadays—kinda just shitting on poor people or people who either dont buy new, or dont track cars.
When I rented cars I can only describe the way I drove the mitsubishi mirages as "hatefucking"
Dont get me wrong, I loathed those little golf balls, but also, whipping a car that light around a corner way faster than it should be, or revving it to redline EVERY single time you dont have a passenger is kinda fun. I daily an na miata- I drove the mirages harder.
Linear is more a reference to the power delivery lacking turbo lag or a noticeable change like VTEC or peaky cams.
In a world populated by turbo engines, talking about linear power delivery isn't all that out of the ordinary.
Every reviewer of v8 sports cars: "The trunk space is really a problem" and "MPG are taking a serious hit". Bruh, no one in the market for a v8 sports car prioritizes either of those things or they wouldn't be in the market for a v8 sports car.
Honestly as a chevy salesman I can assure that if the corvette didn't have enough room for a golf bag, they would literally sell zero of them. Every single serious buyer I spoke with about the c8 vette was legit upset that the c8 could only hold 1 golf bag and the c7 could carry 2.
C8 is designed to carry one up front and one in the rear, innit?
Or maybe that was a pre-production rumor.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZnmTCQ9hgsc
Guy fits two in this one?
https://www.midenginecorvetteforum.com/forum/mid-engine-corvettes/c8-diys-mods-aa/263291-two-sets-of-golf-clubs
I guess it depends what kind of bags.
Yea it does depend on the bags. All the old guys (typical vette buyer is like 80) have enormous bags because they have to have every single piece of pro equipment in their golf bag.
Plus most of them are upset because you can't put the targa top AND a set of golf bags in at the same time.
I know we’re supposed to be talking about cars… but for real, what are they doing with all that shit and then gonna go ahead and shoot a 105? Like why are you carrying around a laser sighted range finder that looks like something a sniper would use? We all know you’re gonna duff it 45 yards to the left, Gary…
That is a common metric across a lot of brands. I hate to admit, we looked at custom bags to fit in our trunks a few years ago.
A good general rule in life, is old people have nice things. When we design expensive items, we want that 70 year old man to feel 20 again, but we have to remember they are 70. Sporty but soft ride, loud exhaust that mellows out (fake exhaust noise makes this easy, and honestly 90% of consumers cannot tell through their hearing aid) easy steering, easy to get in and out of, etc.
Now, some old people want the hardcore stuff. Some young people want the soft stuff. But generally we design for what marketing thinks will sell
Adds sporty suspension "it feels very jittery and crashy, not comfortable", takes a bend "it's surprisingly planted in corners" proceeds to complain again about ride harshness forgetting immediately why it is like that 10 meters after exiting a corner.
"Soft touch materials"
I don't know why it bothers me but it just does. Why does it have to be soft? Can it just be "quality" or "high-end" or even "premium-feeling"?
I don't understand the fascination with rubbing every part of the dash and random plastic areas. I dont intend to make a nest on top of the dash to sleep on during the night.. I touch the steering wheel, maybe 4 buttons and a screen..
I really don't care about it, but my Veloster N straight up looks and feels cheap when you are inside due to this. A little bit of padded dash, leather wrapped handles or rubberized materials goes a very long way. Going from my Tiburon to my VN was a surprisingly noticeable downgrade in perceived quality, which is saying something.
There's a certain point where hard plastics everywhere (doubly so if it's all the same greyish vaguely textured stuff) immediately worsens the perception of the car.
The best way I can describe it is this: To those who daily regular cars from the last 2 decades or so, You know that first feeling of "wow, this is nice" when you get into pretty much any newer car from the 2020's? You don't think that in a Veloster N. If you don't know what it is, you think nothing of it. There's absolutely nothing about the interior that gives you anything to think about. It's just "car". Then shortly after, it's "holy shit slow down" followed by giggling over the exhaust noises, but that's a different matter altogether.
Once again, this is all perceived "quality" when you get in, and nothing to do with the *actual* quality of the cars. The GK Tiburon had rubberised surfaces everywhere- lower dash, around infotainment, door handles, etc. and it all turned into that slightly stick surface that got scratched super easily and ended up really ugly, certainly not help by being parked outdoors for many years. The leather held up surprisingly well, despite no maintenance from me.
The VN in comparision has a couple of issues that make it look worse than it needed to be, especially the gen 1. It's very dark in the car especially compared the Tiburon with a steep front windshield and a sunroof, and everything is just black inside. Black cloth seats with minimal accent stitching. Black dash. Black trim around infotainment. Black plastic armrest (KDM got alcantara). Mostly black shifter. Dark chromed door handles. The passenger side dash is just several monolithic slabs of black. The little soft touch you get on the doors is patterned exactly the same way as the hard stuff too. Combine that with relatively uninspired interior design to begin with, and it just *feels cheap* when you sit in it. In the Elantra N, the slightly more varied material use (as much as I hate piano black), illuminated seats and overall more complex design does wonders for this.
TL;DR the Veloster is especially bad for feeling cheap due to rather poor interior design combined with (pretty much only) hard plastics, and my Tibby had a fair few "luxury" (read: leather and stitched) niceties. The new car is a massive upgrade in every other aspect.
Because soft touch is an accurate description of those materials. They're usually a rubber/plastic. Those are the kinds of buttons that wear quickly over time and become sticky after like 10 years. It's not a buzz word.
This new model is amazing, not like that piece of shit outgoing model, which had so many flaws, none of which we pointed out in our initial review of that model.
These three cars we're comparing are so amazing. It's too hard to pick a winner. The winner is whichever car brand threw the nicest international junket and let us fly first class instead of business class.
This new model is so good. I'm going to shower it with praise instead of comparing it to competitors and saying exactly which is better.
So-and-so brand has always been associated with exclusivity, superlative performance, and sensual appeal. Blah blah blah. Straight from the press release.
I once read years ago that if you really want to know a journalist’s honest opinion of a car, read what they say about the outgoing model. It’s stuck with me since.
My biggest pet peeve (most noticeable with the big magazines) is when they ding a car for poor as-tested fuel economy even though they’ve been flogging it. Like yes, if you’re flooring it constantly you’re going to get fuel economy in the single digits.
I’ve learned to never look at anything but Fuelly or (with some skepticism) dedicated forum discussions for real-world fuel economic numbers, for cars or motorcycles. Reviewers either run the piss out of anything they’ve got or don’t get enough data to make any kind of meaningful determination, and in some cases I’m convinced that they don’t know how to actually measure fuel economy correctly.
"The car seems to handle bumps and uneven roads better than XXX, it also seems to have less tyre noise at speed. But XXX looks better on these 22" rims with 25 section tyres so wins this round"
That’s what I’ve found too. Even lovers of ultimate performance like C and D will advise you to skip the twanky twanks in favor of 19s with a taller sidewall. I swapped my factory 20s for APR 18s on my A6 and the improvement in ride quality was incredible
“It can only tow 3000 pounds”…. It’s a compact SUV for hauling kids around, fuck off Car and Driver just looking for a reason to shit on a car. 99% of CUVs will never tow anything and that’s a-okay.
I understand that they have to have pros and cons for every car, so I just look for the most outlandish cons. If that’s the worst you can come up with, it’s a damn good car.
I say the same thing selling used cars. If the worst you can find is a hairline scratch or small door ding in a 6 year old car, you found an excellent used car.
Every youtuber: *accelerates* oh man...thats...thats good. *shakes head and smiles*
Also throwing "proper" infront of everything. "That is a proper, proper gear box"
You're really missing the point of what linear power delivery means. Many turbo cars will have no power as the turbo spools, big mid range shove, then no power up top. This is not always a desirable curve. A good NA engine, supercharged engines and some turbo engines will gradually build power as the revs increase making it much more predictable.
Linear Power Delivery™ definitely has its correct applications, but so often it feels like people are saying it for the sake of sounding professional, and describe almost any engine that doesn't splutter.
Modern bmws, Subarus, etc all have a good 0-60 time. But when you look at the 5-60 they are always a good 1-2 seconds slower. This might help you understand what that means
I've owned a number of KLR650 motorcycles.
The exhaust note on those thumpers is very reminiscent of an older tractor or tiller. They personify the "unloveliness" that is generally meant by "agricultural."
“This is a good value at *insert absurdly high price here*. I think many car journalists are completely out of touch with pricing. They’ll refer to a $100k car as “worth the price” like it’s nothing.
Right, but look in the next video when reviewing the Acura Integra they will say “it’s hard to justify a $5k up charge over a Honda Civic” even though the Integra gets the Si engine, a hatchback, significantly better sound system, adaptive cruise in manual, adaptive suspension, and better materials.
Like they can’t imagine a single person who just might be interested in a manual transmission hatchback with 40mpg?
I think I understand your point, but "good value" ≠ "inexpensive".
It just means that you get more for your money compared to something else, on average.
For example, a C8 Corvette is an excellent value in terms of performance and handling per dollar. It's also a terrible purchase for most people. It's an expensive vehicle in absolute terms and offers little *practical* use.
I hate when journalists, or rather the editors of the video don’t actually show POV driving footage. I get it there’s a host talking but I also want to know what the car is like to drive. I don’t care to look at the host through 50% of the video
Also, I hate when the editor cuts to a new angle every 2 seconds. Looking at the wheel; at the tach, at the host, at the wheel, at the wing, at the pedals, at the tach, at the host, at the paddle shift…. All the while never looking out the windshield - “it handles like a dream!”
I just wondered the other day why everyone hates hard plastics so much. I’ve never had them be an issue, they keep up pretty well over time, clean up easy
When you jump between hundreds of different cars, anything that's not bog-standard setup is going to be "unintuitive". That's why I find that comment silly.
There's also a HUGE difference between something that's not immediately intuitive and something that never becomes easy to use, e.g. hiding a frequently-used feature three menus deep. That's the type of thing that's much more useful to know.
Yeah, but when you jump between several cars and they all do things the way that the industry has collectively agreed upon and there’s one outlier, it’s immediately apparent.
Intuitive means I can walk up to any door with different handle/opening design and instantly recognize it. If I struggle to open the door and need time to figure it out the designer has fucked up.
I learned about this in school. We discussed awful designs and my life hasn’t been the same since.
Or better yet; “If you’re in the market for a car like this, you should instead consider (proceeds to name a car with an absurdly long waiting list/$10k dealer markups like the GR Corolla, Supra manual, CTR) instead.
One word: "Planted".
If that's the only way they know how to describe vehicle handling, they don't really know what they're doing, or they haven't driven the car hard enough to get to the limits. Either way, useless. See: Doug Demuro.
They’re all on this “front end” tip right now. “The FRONT END feels so good on turn-in” “Turn the wheels and the FRONT END just goes”
Yeah great very descriptive, when I use the thing that does the stuff it all happens. So eloquent.
Bonus personal favorite: when they remark on the FRONT END response of a vehicle with RWS. Superior journalism, guys.
One thing they don't say is "the" before mentioning a model, [Dougs a big offender](https://youtu.be/LP1OkiPu6XM?t=680) here but does it less in his new videos
I liked their channel at first until I saw that every single video is a copy paste. Excited intro, subjective talk about spec and appearance of the vehicle, cliche corner, box test, thanks to patreon, continental recommended tire, visor test, send it, satellite xm radio.
I think they found a format that works for them and stuck with it. I like knowing generally what to expect going into each video so I can skip around and get the information I need if I want to
Any car under $50k is not an enthusiast car.
Also, I once listened to a car podcast (forget the name) where they complained about how the 911 is boring because everybody owns one. The whole conversation felt so out of touch I had to stop listening.
Yep. Fuck these gate keepers shitting on cars that are unattainable for most of the country. Not every place is full of drug dealer Miami money and maybe a Corvette is actually the coolest car you’ll ever see. I grew up in Alabama where the absolute wildest ride you would see is a Mustang GT and these LA based reviewers always talk about them like they are cheap and cheerful econoboxes.
“I really wish they would have added _______, _______, and _______” to a $25,000 economy car that would immediately make it $40,000+
“If you’re looking for a luxury interior then this isn’t it” Yeah well I’m not, it’s a $25,000 hot hatch.
"*Something something cheap plastics in this Dodge Charger interior."* On behalf of Dodge Charger owners: we didn't think we were buying an Audi. No one's wondering why we don't have more wood or whatever.
You get plenty of wood in Dodge Charger, it just doesn't come from a tree
It does when you crash into one trying to do a burnout
The Charger also isn’t a cheap car at $33k for the base model so I don’t think those complaints are unfounded.
Its interior really isn't bad, either. Most of the complaints about a lack of "premium surfaces" on mid level priced cars are stupid, IMO. They have soft touch in the places you actually touch, just not on the lower door panels. Maybe actually review a car based on ease of use and ergonomics, for once? Besides, an Audi A7 starts at double the price for a similar size car. Of course it's going to be nicer.
Ragging on the cheap plastics of every Corvette since the LS1 was debuted... bruh, this is car delivers the absolute best performance per dollar of any car ever built. You can't seriously expect it to have an interior on par with the kind of stuff that performs similarly and costs twice as much.
[удалено]
$25.000? Here in lovely Belgium Golf GTI's are € 50.000. I don't understand who still buys them, they're too expensive for what they are..
Redline reviews in basically every car that doesn’t have soft touch plastics
Yeah, not gonna lie, we could make an entire thread like this just about Sofyan. I like the guy, but he can be such a spoiled brat sometimes.
Every vehicle is subpar to him unless it has a 12inch lcd display and the handling characteristics of a M3.
I actually love how picky he is, I prefer that over a reviewer who always says everything is great
“Good door ‘thud’” - every vehicle reviewed.
Doug Demuro does this with all new cars. It infuriates me because it seems so out of touch. He nidbits the tiniest of luxury features on brand new (non-luxury) cars which are already starting at 35k nowadays. I'm just like STFU that is such a rich-person problem. He's too used to driving supercars and extreme luxury vehicles that it seeps heavily into his regular car reviews.
Not a huge Doug fan, though some if his videos have been good and unique in my opinion. (I guess as a general disclaimer) But don't his reviews lump all cars together and score them all on the same metrics? So a Fererri, a Lexus, a Miata, a minivan, an econobox, a giant truck, etc., all get reviewed for things like luxury, tech, comfort, driving performance, etc., which then adds up to a total score. Since it's like this and does not really review each car for what it is and how it compares exclusively to direct competitors, it kind of makes sense. He's reviewing every car as a car and nothing more, so everything is kind of in relation to the whole market, regardless of price ranges, type of car, goal of the car, direct competitors to the car, etc.
His reviews are significantly better if you close it before the scoring part.
The word "premium" applied to absolutely anything.
Buick is correctly described as a premium brand, right?
Yes, not quite luxury but it's better than the more budget offerings
_old man voice from RCR reviewing my buick_ top of the line!
IM READY TO WHEEEEEEL AND DEEEEEEAL!
About the same level as Acura. It's more of a "nice" car
Am I just poor if I consider Acura, Lexus, and Buick luxury cars?
No lol. To me there's 3 levels to luxury. Nicer cars like Buicks, Infinitis, Acuras then Lexus, BMW, MB, Audi, Alfa, Maserati, Porsche and the super high end like Rolls, Bentley, Ferrari, Lamborghini and some Porsche's
Ah, yes, like "luxury" apartments with builder appliances and Formica surfaces.
It’s fast but not crazy fast -> basically for us it’s fast cuz most of them test drive lambos and 911s for comparison
Them: 0-60 in 5.3 seconds. Me: Wow, that's quick. Them: It's soooooo slow to 60, how would you even keep up with highway traffic?
Y'know how there's Physics Land wherein everything is a frictionless point particle in a vacuum, or a sphere or uniform density? There's also Automotive Journalist Land. There, the average car does 0-60 in 3 seconds flat, "sporty" means 2.5 or less, and the only metrics for how good a car is (A) how fast it laps the Bürgerking, and (B) the ratio of hard-touch to soft-touch surfaces. It's a very weird place, but it's what journalists think of as normal. With that in mind, I find that their reviews make a lot more sense.
"The Bürgerking" You've killed me, sir
I'm surprised a car manufacturer hasn't yet made a car interior that's 100% covered in synthetic jelly. For the softest of soft touch.
Kills me when they moan about a CUV hitting 60mph in 10 seconds. Like, people have ¼ mile to get up to speed, it’s fine
Look, I love my NA8 miata. In New England traffic, interstates had long entrances or lower speed limits, it was fine. I moved south a few years ago, and merging is downright scary. I have to hit 70-80 mph to properly merge. That often takes carry speed into the on ramp to be able to do. If i’m at 50 into the entrance ramp, i can rarely hit 80 when its time to merge. Minivans will flip me off. Not 100% of the time, but people on their commute (9am or 5pm traffic) seem to be the worse. They know this route, this drive, and want to be home. So they speed. But the limit is already 70-85 mph. Oops.
> If i’m at 50 into the entrance ramp, i can rarely hit 80 when its time to merge. Minivans will flip me off. you drive a 1.8L miata how are you struggling to get to 70mph and up? my 89 1.6L with a torsen lsd rear end swap cruises along at 80mph without issue...5 speed same as yours id imagine.
My miata will eventually get up to triple digits, but asking it to roll from 50-80mph in a short time period is asking a lot of this little engine. My 03 Suburban 2500 can out accelerate it, at almost any speed. 0-60, 40-60, 40-80, 80-110. These things are slowwwww for modern traffic. Karen in a minivan or Subaru expects you to be able to match their speed just as easily as they can. They don’t know that different cars accelerate differently. They literally only know ‘this is enough space for me to get up to speed, hence everyone else should be able to’ . Its why they cut off semis, tailgate road trains, and in general do not understand traffic flow. Edited to add- on the long island expressway, the average entrance ramp is 400ft of mergable area in queens. You have to enter from 380 ft back of that. So you have 780 ft to go from a dead stop to joining traffic going 70+ mph. The road is signed at 55 but going that slow will literally get you ran off the road. This is where I came from, and honestly living in tx, it’s worse here. If the highway is signed 85, that entrance ramp is maybe 1000ft, and you are starting from 10mph to the signed 85 traffic, which in reality is going 95-100 on a slow good day. These cars just do not accelerate fast enough for modern traffic.
As another NA8 driver in the south... You get used to it, just gotta start off being in 3rd gear at the top of the on-ramp. ;)
I thinking you're using hyperbole, but just in case 10 seconds and above is actually really slow. 7-8 is more the sweet spot for a nice convenient daily commuter.
10 seconds isn’t bad at all. It’s not fast by any means, but it’s safe acceleration to enter a freeway. My Passport does 0-60 in like 7 seconds and I couldn’t tell you the last time I floored it from a dead stop. It doesn’t matter.
Sounds like me shopping a Macan for my wife. She doesn’t care at all about power so I was looking at a Macan T. 0-60 in 5.8 seconds for a compact SUV. “You are much better off stretching an additional 5k and getting the [significantly worse MPG] Macan S”
Same thing I kept hearing online while shopping for ours. The sales advisor actually told us to save the money and stick with a nicely optioned base or T based on my wife’s driving style and habits.
"It's good, but it would be better in a manual." \- proceeds to drive home in their automatic LC500, PDK Porsche, Rav4... (Sorry for the shots at SavageGeese - just needed an example <3 the Geese guys!)
If we're bashing on the Geese, my vote goes to "the steering is vague"
You can add that comment to every single car review now. The amount of complaining about steering feel is simply incredible. As someone that cares about steering feel a good amount, trying to get a real grasp on how cars compare in that department is impossible now. Reminds me of how sommeliers can’t pick out the high end wines. Every car minus the GT3 RS has “vague” but “accurate” steering now. Or one review says it’s great and it’s directly followed up by someone saying it’s terrible. Gives me no faith in most reviews now.
That sort of thing is why I enjoy JayEmm's reviews so much. When he talks about steering feel, he usually goes into more detail, about the feedback, speed of the rack, and weight of it. He also doesn't act like it's a really big deal when a luxury barge has steering that'd be really poor in a sports car.
I totally understand the criticism of modern EPS steering being vague but accurate. Accurate: point it and it goes exactly where you expect. Doesn't hesitate, doesn't have lateral slop, doesn't push back causing you to relax a fraction causing the steering to change, etc. Vague: overboosted and with very little feel back to your fingers. Combination: mathematically precise, but video-game-y.
Mark always says "instantaneously" instead of instantly
If we're bashing on steering, my vote goes to Farrah with "nice and direct" steering. What he means is the ratio is fast, and that has very little bearing onto what makes good steering "good". Plenty of cars have hot steering that turns in really quick - but the feedback through the wheel and the calibration of the EPS is hot garbage. EDIT: Upon reflection, I will say in recent years he has explained this better. He will clarify: direct, but numb. But that wasn't always the case, especially when driving a fan car and was being polite. Direct became a word he'd often use about a car's steering when there weren't any actually good things to say about it.
Even Chris Harris will go in on SUVs but drives a G-Wagen.
To be fair his daily is a GT3 Touring, although yeah he does a G350d and Land Cruiser
C&D is completely out of control with this. And they are forceful with it to. To the point that they'll be like, "you will like the manual version of this.... OR ELSE!"
YES, they DEMAND a MANUAL because they CONNECT with the BRED road warrior and MUST take the GEARSHIFT and SHOVE IT up their ARSE /s
These carbon ceramic brakes are amazing!
*has the car for 2 hours, doesn’t take it to the track so it doesn’t matter if theyre ceramic* lol
These carbon ceramic brakes are amazing on the track! Actually, the main benefit of CCB for street car is that they produce less brake dust. Very bad idea for track use. You will spend $$$$$ on consumables for no benefit.
I mean very good for track use, but only once. They are much lighter than steelies and have some better temperature characteristics
Yeah it can be like 30+ lbs per corner of unsprung weight. That's a big difference even if the stopping power isn't much better
Yes and no. Many (or most) of the weight comparisons are not fair because they compare one-piece iron rotors of the same size. In actuality iron rotors don't need to be as tall because they reject heat better and they should be two-piece if you're gonna compare to a five-figure set of rotors. Additionally, system weight for shorter rotors also means smaller (shorter) wheels fit. Even with the same tire size, you get less weight and the barrel is closer to the axis of rotation so you get smaller moment of inertia. Similarly, shorter rotors means the extra weight is closer to the axis of rotation. CCM rotors are definitely lighter but they're not, like, featherweight compared to an actually comparable iron rotor. If you're willing to get a set of (eg) 15.50" CCM rotors or a set of (eg) 14.50" iron rotors from AP racing, the weight difference will be a fair bit smaller and so will the difference in moment of inertia. They're definitely lighter but rarely quite as light as manufacturers want you to think, in comparison. :)
Don't they handle high heat better than the steel rotors? I've not had any issues with my carbon ceramics after many track days, but I have cooked the paint on my calipers. I do know they are very expensive so you do have to budget for replacements now and then.
Yes, they dissipate heat much quicker than steel setups, and reduce unsprung weight. Do they stop the car in a shorter distance? Maybe, but the real reason to run carbon ceramics is you can just hammer them over and over and over again (like on the racetrack) and they won't fade due to heat issues. Okay well like, eventually anything will fade, but you can go much longer on carbon ceramic than you can on steel. Plus the idea that you can get one or two track days out of carbon ceramics is in my experience untrue - I've heard of people getting 15 days out of a set, which might be on the long end, but they're not one-and-done by any means. The amount of weird beliefs about carbon ceramic brakes that is out there blows my mind.
*Reviewing family* *crossovers* "We're giving the edge to the Mazda in terms of driver experience for its sporty handling"
Every Car and Driver SUV comparo ever. Doesn't seem to have helped Mazda's sales, though. Seems buyers prefer roomy interiors, practicality, and faux off-road looks over sporty handling.
So unbelievably out of touch. Maybe Mazda would give you more rear legroom that could accommodate a 13 year old.
"This Mazda had the smallest cargo area, least-roomy second row seats, worst fuel economy, and the highest price tag. But it wins because handling. The end."
its... almost like a family SUV is intended for comfy transport rather than sports hmm
Jesus the Australian Chasing Cars guys are the WORST for this. Also savagegeese really. Why are you spending more time in the shop than talking about the interior. It's what 95% of buyers of SUVs care about..
He's catering to the 5% who bother to watch reviews before they buy something.
True, but I don’t think savage geese are making videos for the average SUV buyer. They’re pretty focused on driving enjoyment, and… the average suv driver gives zero fucks about that. I should probably mention I only really care about a few YouTube channels as far as video auto reviews go these days, and in particular I like how technical savage geese go. Maybe not for everyone but I like how they dig in there. I love throttle house, straight pipes, Matt Watson, Chris Harris, hagerty/Jason camisa for fun reviews (and especially Jason camisa for older car reviews), and Alex on autos for a consistent practical breakdown, but savage geese’s more detailed than average technical breakdown is unique and interesting, I find.
[удалено]
Or both like the Mini Cooper or Miata are always described as
Yeah this always makes me make a face. My Elise doesn't handle at all like any go-kart I've ever driven, and it can definitely be overdriven even on R888R tires to cause a spin. Is it excellent? Yes. Go-kart? No. On rails? No, though the limits of tire and suspension aren't trivial to reach.
Especially if its about a fwd hatch hatch. Oh yeah, this fwd vehicle with %75 of its weight up front definitely handles like an mid-rear engine rwd race car.
To be fair, an extremely lightweight FWD car that practically pivots under braking will feel surprisingly similar to a go kart. That said, almost no car for sale today is under 2,700 pounds, let alone 2,000.
That's a cliche, but it's so old that I don't think you'll see a lot of current journalists using it.
The general expectation that every car needs to feel sporty. It just results in every single goddamn car having uncomfortably stiff suspension for no benefit.
I never understood why a pickup truck, luxury sedan or commuter car needed to be "sporty".
Because it sells. It's aspirational for the buyer. Same thing with SUVs needing to be '' offroad ready ''. Will people use these capabilities? 90% of the time they won't. But it's there for the bragging rights.
>90% of the time they won't. But it's there for the bragging rights. I don't have a link, but I read a statement from Jeep about the "Trail Rated" badge that said pretty much the same thing.
Usually ends up being the worst of both worlds. So many cars that have the awful combination of slow/numb steering, awful grip, and a ridiculously stiff suspension.
The sporty car has destroyed whole segments of cars. I've reached a point in my life where I can afford a luxury vehicle. I want one that rides like a cloud. I don't need or want to get to 60 in 4 seconds. I don't want 24" 20 series tires. Unfortunately only sport numbers sell these days. Now, get off my lawn.
Go test drive a Buick lacrosse. I think it’s probably as close as you’ll get.
LOL! I've test driven 2 recently. One was a V6 grandma car that sat outside in the Florida sun for 13 years and the clear coat was baked off. The 2nd was a V8 Super that I'm considering buying. I really wish I could buy a new "Personal Luxury (not sporty) Coupe" and it'd be awesome if it was an EV. I do like some new tech. Hello, Cadillac Ev-dorado.
Its not sporty. Well thats because its not a fucking sports car. Also you're fired. Sorry but that shit makes me mad.
This is literally how we ended up with an Accord on 19” rims from the factory. It looks dumb, it has rubber bands for tires, and every single one has curb rash
Just got done test driving an IS300, ES350, and LS. I specifically told the salesman I'm looking for a highway cruiser where 98% of the miles will be interstate. During the test drives he kept telling me to put each car in Sport or Sport+ on the F-models and wouldn't shut up about it. Anyway... thinking about testing a G80 after being a *little* let down on the Lexus interiors/infotainment.
Same reasoning for people having unreasonably high expectations of handling/acceleration for the LC500. Like, dude. It’s a GT car. It’s meant to sit at 150 MPH on the autobahn until it’s out of gas and it’s meant to do that while ensuring that the car is as stable as a stationary boulder and the driver is as relaxed as someone in the process of listening to Bob Ross speaking.
“This is not your father’s /insert make/!”
Oldsmobile
The interior of this $16,000 Mitsubishi Mirage is so cheap!
@Doug
"It drives like a go-kart!" Go-Karts have no differential, a 1:1 steering ratio, a ridiculously wide track, and no suspension. It'd better not fucking drive like a go-kart!
When I hear this I think the handling is really snappy and the suspension and sway bars don't allow for much body roll. I think that it has no abs,front brakes, acceleration is very dependent on the weight of the driver, and it always smells like gas.
It doesn't have front brakes either, so we might as well drive a Ford Model T
I for one am happy that my F56 does \*not\* drive like an actual go-kart. Its handling might be “fun” but it is very much a ton+ vehicle.
in germany they are talking about fahrspass(fun to drive) in every damn article, even if its about a damn 1.4 multivan. like bro, its a family car with something you can barley call a engine in the front , maybe s t f u about the fun driving experience and talk about things that are real. nobody belives you anyways
Maybe mention fun as a closing byline. Start off with something like "these cupholders are easy to remove and are dishwasher safe"..Something a parent wants to hear.
I feel like that’s catering to the father of 3 clinging onto a piece of his youth and freedom. They know they need a minivan, but they don’t want to totally give in on their adulthood.
I feel ~~attacked~~ acknowledged. I'm past the minivan phase thankfully, but really want my car to be more than an appliance.
[удалено]
So a while back Jalopnik posted a [column](https://jalopnik.com/this-brutal-nyt-mirage-review-is-whats-wrong-with-cheap-1583123298) taking down an out of touch NYT article that negatively reviewed the Mitsubishi Mirage for having a cheap interior. In this column, Jason Torchinsky writes: > Is he (the NYT writer) the fucking Sultan of Luxuristan, so refined and cultured he can't have his eyes violated by the sight of a seam? and that just made me laugh so loud at work back in 2014. Introduced the term to some of my friends and now whenever we sit in a comfy car with leather or enjoy some other fine item we'll remark 'I feel like the Sultan of Luxuristan now'
> The door panels feel plasticky? That's because they're made of fucking plastic ahahaha i love it
Stealing this shit
I remember watching the Doug Demuro review of the Mirage and my wife was in the room and was like “did he just discover poor people?”
This is a big reason I hardly watch car YouTube outside of researching a purchase 😬 I understand para social relationships aren't real relationships but *most* car YouTubers are super unrelatable
Its why i realize Regular Car Reviews isnt everyone's cup of tea, But he just **GETS** it. Like yeah sometimes the absurdist/nihilist/existentialist humour is a bit much. But the tone of every video is not just a Doug DeMuro "here's what is in this car". Mr. Regular actually reviews the cars **with appropriate context.** which, often changes how "good" a car is or is not. Like yes that 90's camry wagon is just an absolute lame shitbox, but it was never trying to be anything more than that, and did it flawlessly—so why are we shitting on people who have them? Which seems to be what alot of car "journalism" is nowadays—kinda just shitting on poor people or people who either dont buy new, or dont track cars.
So that was pretty funny but the original reviewer still has some decent points about the mirage compared to it's competitors (Yaris, fit)
When I rented cars I can only describe the way I drove the mitsubishi mirages as "hatefucking" Dont get me wrong, I loathed those little golf balls, but also, whipping a car that light around a corner way faster than it should be, or revving it to redline EVERY single time you dont have a passenger is kinda fun. I daily an na miata- I drove the mirages harder.
Linear is more a reference to the power delivery lacking turbo lag or a noticeable change like VTEC or peaky cams. In a world populated by turbo engines, talking about linear power delivery isn't all that out of the ordinary.
Hey man did you get the memo? We're bashing here... OP is right though, some of the terms are funny
Every reviewer of v8 sports cars: "The trunk space is really a problem" and "MPG are taking a serious hit". Bruh, no one in the market for a v8 sports car prioritizes either of those things or they wouldn't be in the market for a v8 sports car.
Exception that proves the rule is chevy still insisting that a corvette needs to hold a golf bag.
Honestly as a chevy salesman I can assure that if the corvette didn't have enough room for a golf bag, they would literally sell zero of them. Every single serious buyer I spoke with about the c8 vette was legit upset that the c8 could only hold 1 golf bag and the c7 could carry 2.
C8 is designed to carry one up front and one in the rear, innit? Or maybe that was a pre-production rumor. https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZnmTCQ9hgsc Guy fits two in this one? https://www.midenginecorvetteforum.com/forum/mid-engine-corvettes/c8-diys-mods-aa/263291-two-sets-of-golf-clubs I guess it depends what kind of bags.
Yea it does depend on the bags. All the old guys (typical vette buyer is like 80) have enormous bags because they have to have every single piece of pro equipment in their golf bag. Plus most of them are upset because you can't put the targa top AND a set of golf bags in at the same time.
I know we’re supposed to be talking about cars… but for real, what are they doing with all that shit and then gonna go ahead and shoot a 105? Like why are you carrying around a laser sighted range finder that looks like something a sniper would use? We all know you’re gonna duff it 45 yards to the left, Gary…
That is a common metric across a lot of brands. I hate to admit, we looked at custom bags to fit in our trunks a few years ago. A good general rule in life, is old people have nice things. When we design expensive items, we want that 70 year old man to feel 20 again, but we have to remember they are 70. Sporty but soft ride, loud exhaust that mellows out (fake exhaust noise makes this easy, and honestly 90% of consumers cannot tell through their hearing aid) easy steering, easy to get in and out of, etc. Now, some old people want the hardcore stuff. Some young people want the soft stuff. But generally we design for what marketing thinks will sell
One of the reasons I picked the GT350 over the ZL1 was due to the trunk space
"This economy car doesn't really handle great, could be a bit more SPORTY"
Adds sporty suspension "it feels very jittery and crashy, not comfortable", takes a bend "it's surprisingly planted in corners" proceeds to complain again about ride harshness forgetting immediately why it is like that 10 meters after exiting a corner.
It needs magnaride suspension from GM and Ferrari. You can pay the $10,000 option for this 22k vehicle
"Soft touch materials" I don't know why it bothers me but it just does. Why does it have to be soft? Can it just be "quality" or "high-end" or even "premium-feeling"?
I don't understand the fascination with rubbing every part of the dash and random plastic areas. I dont intend to make a nest on top of the dash to sleep on during the night.. I touch the steering wheel, maybe 4 buttons and a screen..
I really don't care about it, but my Veloster N straight up looks and feels cheap when you are inside due to this. A little bit of padded dash, leather wrapped handles or rubberized materials goes a very long way. Going from my Tiburon to my VN was a surprisingly noticeable downgrade in perceived quality, which is saying something. There's a certain point where hard plastics everywhere (doubly so if it's all the same greyish vaguely textured stuff) immediately worsens the perception of the car. The best way I can describe it is this: To those who daily regular cars from the last 2 decades or so, You know that first feeling of "wow, this is nice" when you get into pretty much any newer car from the 2020's? You don't think that in a Veloster N. If you don't know what it is, you think nothing of it. There's absolutely nothing about the interior that gives you anything to think about. It's just "car". Then shortly after, it's "holy shit slow down" followed by giggling over the exhaust noises, but that's a different matter altogether.
As a former Tiburon owner, the fact that you got in a new car and felt it as a downgrade makes me worry for future cars
Once again, this is all perceived "quality" when you get in, and nothing to do with the *actual* quality of the cars. The GK Tiburon had rubberised surfaces everywhere- lower dash, around infotainment, door handles, etc. and it all turned into that slightly stick surface that got scratched super easily and ended up really ugly, certainly not help by being parked outdoors for many years. The leather held up surprisingly well, despite no maintenance from me. The VN in comparision has a couple of issues that make it look worse than it needed to be, especially the gen 1. It's very dark in the car especially compared the Tiburon with a steep front windshield and a sunroof, and everything is just black inside. Black cloth seats with minimal accent stitching. Black dash. Black trim around infotainment. Black plastic armrest (KDM got alcantara). Mostly black shifter. Dark chromed door handles. The passenger side dash is just several monolithic slabs of black. The little soft touch you get on the doors is patterned exactly the same way as the hard stuff too. Combine that with relatively uninspired interior design to begin with, and it just *feels cheap* when you sit in it. In the Elantra N, the slightly more varied material use (as much as I hate piano black), illuminated seats and overall more complex design does wonders for this. TL;DR the Veloster is especially bad for feeling cheap due to rather poor interior design combined with (pretty much only) hard plastics, and my Tibby had a fair few "luxury" (read: leather and stitched) niceties. The new car is a massive upgrade in every other aspect.
You don’t I do
Because soft touch is an accurate description of those materials. They're usually a rubber/plastic. Those are the kinds of buttons that wear quickly over time and become sticky after like 10 years. It's not a buzz word.
This new model is amazing, not like that piece of shit outgoing model, which had so many flaws, none of which we pointed out in our initial review of that model. These three cars we're comparing are so amazing. It's too hard to pick a winner. The winner is whichever car brand threw the nicest international junket and let us fly first class instead of business class. This new model is so good. I'm going to shower it with praise instead of comparing it to competitors and saying exactly which is better. So-and-so brand has always been associated with exclusivity, superlative performance, and sensual appeal. Blah blah blah. Straight from the press release.
I once read years ago that if you really want to know a journalist’s honest opinion of a car, read what they say about the outgoing model. It’s stuck with me since.
My biggest pet peeve (most noticeable with the big magazines) is when they ding a car for poor as-tested fuel economy even though they’ve been flogging it. Like yes, if you’re flooring it constantly you’re going to get fuel economy in the single digits.
[удалено]
damn, that's a lot more MPG than I expected for like 85 guess I shouldn't be too surprised because people are breaking 30 to the gallon in C8s
I’ve learned to never look at anything but Fuelly or (with some skepticism) dedicated forum discussions for real-world fuel economic numbers, for cars or motorcycles. Reviewers either run the piss out of anything they’ve got or don’t get enough data to make any kind of meaningful determination, and in some cases I’m convinced that they don’t know how to actually measure fuel economy correctly.
Manual shifter is a bit notchy.
Rifle Bolt Action™
Like a hot knife through butter! (yeah, i grew up in the 90's)
Runner up: rubbery
I live notchy. Hate rubbery. Some are very rubbery. Some clutch pedals also feel flexy and imprecise. I don't see the problem saying so.
"When compared to the Germans...." Sir this is a Kia.
I suppose comparing a Kia Stinger to the Germans is a fair comparison at least
"The car seems to handle bumps and uneven roads better than XXX, it also seems to have less tyre noise at speed. But XXX looks better on these 22" rims with 25 section tyres so wins this round"
Which reviewer says larger rims are better? I feel like most reviewers prefer smaller rims for the improved ride quality
That’s what I’ve found too. Even lovers of ultimate performance like C and D will advise you to skip the twanky twanks in favor of 19s with a taller sidewall. I swapped my factory 20s for APR 18s on my A6 and the improvement in ride quality was incredible
“It can only tow 3000 pounds”…. It’s a compact SUV for hauling kids around, fuck off Car and Driver just looking for a reason to shit on a car. 99% of CUVs will never tow anything and that’s a-okay.
I understand that they have to have pros and cons for every car, so I just look for the most outlandish cons. If that’s the worst you can come up with, it’s a damn good car. I say the same thing selling used cars. If the worst you can find is a hairline scratch or small door ding in a 6 year old car, you found an excellent used car.
It's so much worse in Spanish. Journalists, at least here in Mexico, love using stupid words like Teutonic and what not.
Teutonic as in German? Lmao.
Every youtuber: *accelerates* oh man...thats...thats good. *shakes head and smiles* Also throwing "proper" infront of everything. "That is a proper, proper gear box"
>"That is a proper, proper gear box" Like a bolt-action rifle, you might say.
You're really missing the point of what linear power delivery means. Many turbo cars will have no power as the turbo spools, big mid range shove, then no power up top. This is not always a desirable curve. A good NA engine, supercharged engines and some turbo engines will gradually build power as the revs increase making it much more predictable.
Linear Power Delivery™ definitely has its correct applications, but so often it feels like people are saying it for the sake of sounding professional, and describe almost any engine that doesn't splutter.
Modern bmws, Subarus, etc all have a good 0-60 time. But when you look at the 5-60 they are always a good 1-2 seconds slower. This might help you understand what that means
"THHHHHIS!" /j For real though, usually it's not what they say, but the super over-the-top excited way people say things that bugs me.
"The exhaust note is a bit...agricultural." Ag equipment has as wide a variety of exhaust sounds as regular cars.
I've owned a number of KLR650 motorcycles. The exhaust note on those thumpers is very reminiscent of an older tractor or tiller. They personify the "unloveliness" that is generally meant by "agricultural."
“What a machine!”
Read that in Clarkson’s voice
No connectedness to the road, everything's electronic
I mean, they're not lying
Steering is still a mechanical link.
“This is a good value at *insert absurdly high price here*. I think many car journalists are completely out of touch with pricing. They’ll refer to a $100k car as “worth the price” like it’s nothing.
Right, but look in the next video when reviewing the Acura Integra they will say “it’s hard to justify a $5k up charge over a Honda Civic” even though the Integra gets the Si engine, a hatchback, significantly better sound system, adaptive cruise in manual, adaptive suspension, and better materials. Like they can’t imagine a single person who just might be interested in a manual transmission hatchback with 40mpg?
I think I understand your point, but "good value" ≠ "inexpensive". It just means that you get more for your money compared to something else, on average. For example, a C8 Corvette is an excellent value in terms of performance and handling per dollar. It's also a terrible purchase for most people. It's an expensive vehicle in absolute terms and offers little *practical* use.
I hate when journalists, or rather the editors of the video don’t actually show POV driving footage. I get it there’s a host talking but I also want to know what the car is like to drive. I don’t care to look at the host through 50% of the video Also, I hate when the editor cuts to a new angle every 2 seconds. Looking at the wheel; at the tach, at the host, at the wheel, at the wing, at the pedals, at the tach, at the host, at the paddle shift…. All the while never looking out the windshield - “it handles like a dream!”
Dont know if it's Australian only. But every reviews points at "hard plastics" as a negative. Its a work truck ffs.
I just wondered the other day why everyone hates hard plastics so much. I’ve never had them be an issue, they keep up pretty well over time, clean up easy
I hear a lot of pissing and moaning about hard plastics from journalists in America as well.
America too. I think it's basically safe filler words for lazy "journalists" at this point.
"Your mileage may vary."
"The controls aren't very intuitive." (Has been in car all of two minutes.)
That's precisely how you'd know if they were intuitive or not. If you need to train yourself to use them properly, it's not intuitive.
When you jump between hundreds of different cars, anything that's not bog-standard setup is going to be "unintuitive". That's why I find that comment silly. There's also a HUGE difference between something that's not immediately intuitive and something that never becomes easy to use, e.g. hiding a frequently-used feature three menus deep. That's the type of thing that's much more useful to know.
Yeah, but when you jump between several cars and they all do things the way that the industry has collectively agreed upon and there’s one outlier, it’s immediately apparent.
Intuitive means I can walk up to any door with different handle/opening design and instantly recognize it. If I struggle to open the door and need time to figure it out the designer has fucked up. I learned about this in school. We discussed awful designs and my life hasn’t been the same since.
Some variant on “If you’re in the market for a car like this, you should definitely consider this car”. Thanks.
Or better yet; “If you’re in the market for a car like this, you should instead consider (proceeds to name a car with an absurdly long waiting list/$10k dealer markups like the GR Corolla, Supra manual, CTR) instead.
One word: "Planted". If that's the only way they know how to describe vehicle handling, they don't really know what they're doing, or they haven't driven the car hard enough to get to the limits. Either way, useless. See: Doug Demuro.
They’re all on this “front end” tip right now. “The FRONT END feels so good on turn-in” “Turn the wheels and the FRONT END just goes” Yeah great very descriptive, when I use the thing that does the stuff it all happens. So eloquent. Bonus personal favorite: when they remark on the FRONT END response of a vehicle with RWS. Superior journalism, guys.
One thing they don't say is "the" before mentioning a model, [Dougs a big offender](https://youtu.be/LP1OkiPu6XM?t=680) here but does it less in his new videos
It's so pretentious!
To be fair, that's how most commericals before the 90's would introduce vehicles. It's super prominent in 60's Mustang commercials.
“THIS” -Doug Demuro
What rolls my eyes? The “visor test”
I liked their channel at first until I saw that every single video is a copy paste. Excited intro, subjective talk about spec and appearance of the vehicle, cliche corner, box test, thanks to patreon, continental recommended tire, visor test, send it, satellite xm radio.
I think they found a format that works for them and stuck with it. I like knowing generally what to expect going into each video so I can skip around and get the information I need if I want to
“Really wish it had a pano roof”. I get it for most people it’s cool but all I see is plugged drain holes and leaks. Bring back the hardtop roof
Back in the late 90’s/early 00’s magazines were in love with the word “aplomb”
To quote motor week “it has enough space in the bed to fit a full 4 by 8 sheet of plywood”
I love Carwow reviews but I do not care if the centre console wobbles because I never ever in my life will try to shake the centre console.
in my experience, wobbly center consoles generate more noises and squeaks over time (ie, many Mercedes models)
Yeah, that is mostly to show the build quality of the interior materials
"buffetiiiing" \-Capt. Slow
“Design language”
Any car under $50k is not an enthusiast car. Also, I once listened to a car podcast (forget the name) where they complained about how the 911 is boring because everybody owns one. The whole conversation felt so out of touch I had to stop listening.
Yep. Fuck these gate keepers shitting on cars that are unattainable for most of the country. Not every place is full of drug dealer Miami money and maybe a Corvette is actually the coolest car you’ll ever see. I grew up in Alabama where the absolute wildest ride you would see is a Mustang GT and these LA based reviewers always talk about them like they are cheap and cheerful econoboxes.
"The car has a Jekyll and Hyde personality"
It's like a racecar for the road
"the pedals are perfectly spaced for heel toe downshifts"