The quality of car reviews
Discussion
When the choice of cars is so wide, I think car reviews are important, as part of the process of whittling choices down to a short list. I know people who buy a car based only on reviews. It's disappointing, then, to see some reviews that are so poorly done. I have several pet hates when it comes to car reviews, as follows:
1. 29 minutes discussion about the tech, followed by 1 minute, if you're lucky, on how the car drives
2. Reviewers who speak like an AI version of how a presenter should speak. Jayemm is an obvious example, although otherwise a decent reviewer, he speaks like a presenter straight out of central casting. It's grating. Normal conversational tones please!
3. Reviews on cars with top specifications, like air suspension, rear wheel steering etc., which would rarely be ordered. Often, when looking for a second hand car, these options aren't even available. Opinions on handling, suspension etc. become meaningless.
4. Reviews that sound like someone reading from a brochure. Facts, specifications, figures but no subjective comments whatsoever. One fairly well known reviewer does this but I can't be bothered to find him just now.
5. Reviewers who try to be funny, but really aren't (e.g. Carwow). I'll give Clarkson a pass, because he's a brilliant journalist and really is funny IMO.
6. Reviewers who clearly know nothing about cars.
7. Controversially, I'm sure, but most female car reviewers. There are exceptions and I'm no sexist or misogynist, but they simply don't interest me.
There are some good ones out there. I rate Bob Flavin, Tim Rodie and Petrol Ped. Autogefuhl is good, very thorough but they drive on almost perfect German road surfaces so comments on ride quality may not convert to the moonscape we drive on. There are others I can't bring to mind. There are some decent Australian reviewers as well. Americans are just too excitable to listen to for long.
1. 29 minutes discussion about the tech, followed by 1 minute, if you're lucky, on how the car drives
2. Reviewers who speak like an AI version of how a presenter should speak. Jayemm is an obvious example, although otherwise a decent reviewer, he speaks like a presenter straight out of central casting. It's grating. Normal conversational tones please!
3. Reviews on cars with top specifications, like air suspension, rear wheel steering etc., which would rarely be ordered. Often, when looking for a second hand car, these options aren't even available. Opinions on handling, suspension etc. become meaningless.
4. Reviews that sound like someone reading from a brochure. Facts, specifications, figures but no subjective comments whatsoever. One fairly well known reviewer does this but I can't be bothered to find him just now.
5. Reviewers who try to be funny, but really aren't (e.g. Carwow). I'll give Clarkson a pass, because he's a brilliant journalist and really is funny IMO.
6. Reviewers who clearly know nothing about cars.
7. Controversially, I'm sure, but most female car reviewers. There are exceptions and I'm no sexist or misogynist, but they simply don't interest me.
There are some good ones out there. I rate Bob Flavin, Tim Rodie and Petrol Ped. Autogefuhl is good, very thorough but they drive on almost perfect German road surfaces so comments on ride quality may not convert to the moonscape we drive on. There are others I can't bring to mind. There are some decent Australian reviewers as well. Americans are just too excitable to listen to for long.
I hate to break it to you, but most people couldn't care less how a car 'handles'. Even among enthusiasts there is rarely a consensus on what good handling is or means, and it is a difficult thing to quantify.
The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
As above, if you are looking at every car consumer in the UK, a low percentage will really put 'handling' in their list of must haves.
Value and affordability, reliability, running costs, low future costs, functionality and practicality are all much more important to your every day driver.
If you go into the PH sports car owner group, then sure handling and car performance will be whats required, but you are then looking at a niche not a larger broad group of consumers.
Value and affordability, reliability, running costs, low future costs, functionality and practicality are all much more important to your every day driver.
If you go into the PH sports car owner group, then sure handling and car performance will be whats required, but you are then looking at a niche not a larger broad group of consumers.
WH16 said:
I hate to break it to you, but most people couldn't care less how a car 'handles'. Even among enthusiasts there is rarely a consensus on what good handling is or means, and it is a difficult thing to quantify.
The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
And yet the Ford Focus and Fiesta were both top sellers for years, complete with exquisite ride and handling.The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
Makes me wonder; did the everyday people who bought them later 'feel' that something wasn't quite right with whatever they replaced them with (probably a brittle Audi), or could they really not tell a good ride/handling setup from a choppy mess even when driven back to back?
Social media has created lots of different standards. The old guard of Autocar, Auto Express and Car Magazine are one thing, TV presenters like Clarkson another and then we have all the Youtube and social media guys. There is a certain standard to the first group and no standard whatsoever to the last group. The social media bandwagon has created a whole group where every car is just great because they want to be invited back.
This links to the comment above about launch days and the old days of having a car all day. There are far more people wanting a drive now than in the old days. Car companies desperate to get to so many audiences are now inviting every man and his dog. As above though most people dont know what handling is, have no idea how to measure it and many people buy a car based on how much space it has in it, what it looks like, its image and whether the engine runs on the fuel they want and whether its manual or auto.
This links to the comment above about launch days and the old days of having a car all day. There are far more people wanting a drive now than in the old days. Car companies desperate to get to so many audiences are now inviting every man and his dog. As above though most people dont know what handling is, have no idea how to measure it and many people buy a car based on how much space it has in it, what it looks like, its image and whether the engine runs on the fuel they want and whether its manual or auto.
In 1995/1996 I was looking to change my MK2 Golf GTi the MK3 was dismissed because it was a slug of a car, so I looked away from VW to Honda and the 3 door Civic 1.6 VTi caught my eye...I could not get a test drive of one anywhere so I read-up as much as I could and ordered one blind, it was £16,000 in 1996 so not a cheap car.
My God it was awful...those reviews I read all said it was brilliant to drive, handled amazing etc etc, what they didn't mention was the tin plate build quality, an engine you had to rev its nuts off to get anywhere and the most aggressive lift off oversteer I've ever experienced...I lasted eight months with it and moved it on.
Ever since I've never bought a car on the strength of car reviews...I decide if I like to drive it or not.
Saying that I had a very unhelpful test drive of a GR-Yaris...the dealer wouldn't let me "try" it properly.
My God it was awful...those reviews I read all said it was brilliant to drive, handled amazing etc etc, what they didn't mention was the tin plate build quality, an engine you had to rev its nuts off to get anywhere and the most aggressive lift off oversteer I've ever experienced...I lasted eight months with it and moved it on.
Ever since I've never bought a car on the strength of car reviews...I decide if I like to drive it or not.
Saying that I had a very unhelpful test drive of a GR-Yaris...the dealer wouldn't let me "try" it properly.
SweptVolume said:
And yet the Ford Focus and Fiesta were both top sellers for years, complete with exquisite ride and handling.
Makes me wonder; did the everyday people who bought them later 'feel' that something wasn't quite right with whatever they replaced them with (probably a brittle Audi), or could they really not tell a good ride/handling setup from a choppy mess even when driven back to back?
I was thinking about buying an RCZ R at one point, and when I looked at older reviews when it first came out quite a few did throw the front in to corners to demonstrate the handling because it was the major selling point of the car. I am sure the Focus and Fiesta had similar comments.Makes me wonder; did the everyday people who bought them later 'feel' that something wasn't quite right with whatever they replaced them with (probably a brittle Audi), or could they really not tell a good ride/handling setup from a choppy mess even when driven back to back?
But then that is not the norm and more of an exception, the majority of cars sold in the UK are just for trundling about, A to B, packing shopping in, reliable, basically why the SUV is now the most popular type of car of which many don't give two hoots about handling.
Triumph Man said:
lornemalvo said:
6. Reviewers who clearly know nothing about cars.
Agree wholeheartedly - I know absolutely nothing about HiFi, so I would not dream of setting myself up as a reviewer - how can I objectively and thoroughly review something I know nothing about? Everybody thinks they can be a reviewer and you see it with those with fairly low follower counts where they're either shilling for the manufacturer in the hope of getting a free car to review in the future so are in no way objective or critical or ape well established reviewers in their style and humour which rarely works.
You see this a lot when mundane cars are being reviewed and also with Chinese stuff where it seems the reviewers are paid only if they give positive reviews.
I like Autoguful and Marek for the mundane stuff and Jayemm and Throttle house for the fun exotic stuff.
You see this a lot when mundane cars are being reviewed and also with Chinese stuff where it seems the reviewers are paid only if they give positive reviews.
I like Autoguful and Marek for the mundane stuff and Jayemm and Throttle house for the fun exotic stuff.
It's not a desperately original thing to say...but people look for different things from car (or product) reviews.
Some people genuinely just want someone else to read all the stats and blurb out of the brochure and show some nicely-lit B-roll shots of the car and the interior. "Just give us the facts - I don't care about your wittering opinions, I'll make up my own mind!"
I absolutely agree that Clarkson casts a long shadow. In many ways that's good - he was instrumental in shaking car reviews (especially TV/video/filmed car reviews) out of the very dry Woollard/Goffey type one and injecting some personality, creativity and overall Reithian values into the form. There are those to whom the 'Clarkson style' comes naturally and they can put their own spin on it. And there are (unfortunately rather more) those for whom it clearly comes across as playing a part and the 'humour' is either very derivative, very forced or falls completely flat.
I like and appreciate a certain technical depth in car reviews and reviewers. And it's unfortunately rare to find those who I would say hit 'the spot'. Not everyone can be LJK Setright (which is a good thing - as much as I love Setright's work, often just one Setright could be too much Setright, and even he sometimes got too wrapped up in the whole "what Ovid's elegaic couplets can reveal about the rear suspension setup of the new Honda Accord" schtick).
I find that American publications often hit the level of technical analysis and information that I like, with the small problem that they are nearly always discussing cars that I could not buy, even if I fancied it.
Not every review has to be an MEng thesis, but I do feel that a lot of modern reviewers don't have the ability to really 'read' how a car rides, handles, moves and responds and to get that across to the reader or viewer.
When I began road testing cars for a living, one of the best bits of advice one of my time-served colleagues gave me was "you can find out far more about how a car drives by driving it slowly than by hooning it." And that has stood me in very good stead. Obviously cars will respond differently to the same surface at different speeds, or different surfaces at the same speed. But driving a car along a (suitably quiet) bit of road with some interesting humps and bumps at sub-20mph (perhaps even walking pace) will let you quickly get a handle on whether it's softly or harshly sprung, strongly or weakly damped (and is it different in bump and rebound?), which ways the body likes to move (is it predominantly bounce or pitch, or roll?). Are the bushings quiet or noisy? And so on. Which you can then explore at more typical speeds once you've 'dialled in' the baseline.
In my experience, most drivers for whom cars are just an appliance to get from place to place (often the same places, day in day out, year on year) genuinely wouldn't even begin to be conscious of the difference between a Mk5 Escort and a Mk1 Focus when it comes to ride/handling. Dynamics is usually so far down the list of what people prioritise when they choose and assess a car that it's basically invisible. At best you may get them to discern that the Focus is 'easier to drive' or 'a bit nippy', or 'less bouncy' or 'doesn't get pushed around as much on the motorway'.
My Dad is very much 'into cars' in a PH sense, has owned and worked on a large variety of them over the years and can absolutely 'feel' and appreciate a car dynamically. Just before I was born he had an Alfa Romeo Alfasud - widely regarded as one of the best-handling and most dynamically capable small cars of all time. Which was a reputation he absolutely agreed with. All my Mum (not a car person) had to say about the Alfasud was that it was 'too noisy' and she reckoned it was slow, because she drives every car she has ever owned by changing up the gears at 2000rpm regardless of anything else. Which, if you've experience the lofty torque curve of an Alfa boxer engine, is not the way to extract best (or any) performance from it. One of mum's favourite car was a Rover R3 200Vi she had in the 1990s, which she chose after a test drive because...guess what, she could change gear at 2000rpm and it would still pull strongly, thanks to the VVC 16v K-Series. That car, with its sweet race-engineered all-alloy engine and fancy infinitely variable sinusoidal valve gear, spent nearly all its life pottering around at the bottom quarter of its speed range. But Mum loved how 'powerful' it was, and it had very light power steering and strong air conditioning - 10/10!
Some people genuinely just want someone else to read all the stats and blurb out of the brochure and show some nicely-lit B-roll shots of the car and the interior. "Just give us the facts - I don't care about your wittering opinions, I'll make up my own mind!"
I absolutely agree that Clarkson casts a long shadow. In many ways that's good - he was instrumental in shaking car reviews (especially TV/video/filmed car reviews) out of the very dry Woollard/Goffey type one and injecting some personality, creativity and overall Reithian values into the form. There are those to whom the 'Clarkson style' comes naturally and they can put their own spin on it. And there are (unfortunately rather more) those for whom it clearly comes across as playing a part and the 'humour' is either very derivative, very forced or falls completely flat.
I like and appreciate a certain technical depth in car reviews and reviewers. And it's unfortunately rare to find those who I would say hit 'the spot'. Not everyone can be LJK Setright (which is a good thing - as much as I love Setright's work, often just one Setright could be too much Setright, and even he sometimes got too wrapped up in the whole "what Ovid's elegaic couplets can reveal about the rear suspension setup of the new Honda Accord" schtick).
I find that American publications often hit the level of technical analysis and information that I like, with the small problem that they are nearly always discussing cars that I could not buy, even if I fancied it.
Not every review has to be an MEng thesis, but I do feel that a lot of modern reviewers don't have the ability to really 'read' how a car rides, handles, moves and responds and to get that across to the reader or viewer.
When I began road testing cars for a living, one of the best bits of advice one of my time-served colleagues gave me was "you can find out far more about how a car drives by driving it slowly than by hooning it." And that has stood me in very good stead. Obviously cars will respond differently to the same surface at different speeds, or different surfaces at the same speed. But driving a car along a (suitably quiet) bit of road with some interesting humps and bumps at sub-20mph (perhaps even walking pace) will let you quickly get a handle on whether it's softly or harshly sprung, strongly or weakly damped (and is it different in bump and rebound?), which ways the body likes to move (is it predominantly bounce or pitch, or roll?). Are the bushings quiet or noisy? And so on. Which you can then explore at more typical speeds once you've 'dialled in' the baseline.
SweptVolume said:
And yet the Ford Focus and Fiesta were both top sellers for years, complete with exquisite ride and handling.
Makes me wonder; did the everyday people who bought them later 'feel' that something wasn't quite right with whatever they replaced them with (probably a brittle Audi), or could they really not tell a good ride/handling setup from a choppy mess even when driven back to back?
That was an era when the Ford Focus and Fiesta were top sellers largely regardless of the way they drove, though. As the sales records of what came before the Mk1 Focus and the Mk4 Fiesta showed. Same as the Mk3 and Mk4 VW Golf, or the Mk2.5 and Mk3 Polo, or the much-lambasted Vauxhall Vectra and so on. None were any great shakes when it came to dynamics and handling, but sold very well. Makes me wonder; did the everyday people who bought them later 'feel' that something wasn't quite right with whatever they replaced them with (probably a brittle Audi), or could they really not tell a good ride/handling setup from a choppy mess even when driven back to back?
In my experience, most drivers for whom cars are just an appliance to get from place to place (often the same places, day in day out, year on year) genuinely wouldn't even begin to be conscious of the difference between a Mk5 Escort and a Mk1 Focus when it comes to ride/handling. Dynamics is usually so far down the list of what people prioritise when they choose and assess a car that it's basically invisible. At best you may get them to discern that the Focus is 'easier to drive' or 'a bit nippy', or 'less bouncy' or 'doesn't get pushed around as much on the motorway'.
My Dad is very much 'into cars' in a PH sense, has owned and worked on a large variety of them over the years and can absolutely 'feel' and appreciate a car dynamically. Just before I was born he had an Alfa Romeo Alfasud - widely regarded as one of the best-handling and most dynamically capable small cars of all time. Which was a reputation he absolutely agreed with. All my Mum (not a car person) had to say about the Alfasud was that it was 'too noisy' and she reckoned it was slow, because she drives every car she has ever owned by changing up the gears at 2000rpm regardless of anything else. Which, if you've experience the lofty torque curve of an Alfa boxer engine, is not the way to extract best (or any) performance from it. One of mum's favourite car was a Rover R3 200Vi she had in the 1990s, which she chose after a test drive because...guess what, she could change gear at 2000rpm and it would still pull strongly, thanks to the VVC 16v K-Series. That car, with its sweet race-engineered all-alloy engine and fancy infinitely variable sinusoidal valve gear, spent nearly all its life pottering around at the bottom quarter of its speed range. But Mum loved how 'powerful' it was, and it had very light power steering and strong air conditioning - 10/10!
Which is why i usually watch about 5-10 different car reviews for the same car if I am trying to gauge a view.
Each will review in a different style, not always with consensus. As it is individual opinion.
I am sure if you watched a few reviews for the Ferrari 458 when it first came out its all about handling and acceleration - but the latest Nissan Qashqai...
Bit of a common sense and boring answer to the OP really but that's how it is because thats what consumers want to see based on what they are looking up online.
Each will review in a different style, not always with consensus. As it is individual opinion.
I am sure if you watched a few reviews for the Ferrari 458 when it first came out its all about handling and acceleration - but the latest Nissan Qashqai...
Bit of a common sense and boring answer to the OP really but that's how it is because thats what consumers want to see based on what they are looking up online.
WH16 said:
I hate to break it to you, but most people couldn't care less how a car 'handles'. Even among enthusiasts there is rarely a consensus on what good handling is or means, and it is a difficult thing to quantify.
The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
I agree, my priority is comfort.The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
lornemalvo said:
WH16 said:
I hate to break it to you, but most people couldn't care less how a car 'handles'. Even among enthusiasts there is rarely a consensus on what good handling is or means, and it is a difficult thing to quantify.
The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
I agree, my priority is comfort.The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
WH16 said:
I hate to break it to you, but most people couldn't care less how a car 'handles'. Even among enthusiasts there is rarely a consensus on what good handling is or means, and it is a difficult thing to quantify.
The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
Was chatting on this topic just last evening with my Brother in-law (who isn't really a car person).The best selling cars in the UK are - Ford Puma (small SUV), Kia Sportage (mid SUV), Nissan Qashqai (mid SUV), Vauxhall Corsa (small hatch), and VW Golf (mid hatch).
None of them are renown for their handling, with the possible exception of some Golfs, which even enthusiasts would describe as safe, predictable and boring.
He knows I drive a Lexus, and he mentioned that Lexus was releasing new ES saloon (replacement for my GS model) but was worried with the "driving dynamics". I laughed and told him that the majority of the general public wouldn't be able to differentiate between a front or rear wheel driven car
Imo, the public doesn't really care about the handling or the driving dynamics of a car, they are more concern with what badge is stuck at the front of the bonnet! I always remember the inconsistent portrayal of platform sharing by car journalists. The Jaguar X-Type always got panned for sharing its platform with the Ford Mondeo but somehow the Audi A4 was fine sharing the Skoda and VW platform to the point it was never mentioned.
Then again, I remember a lot more VAG advertising in car magazines compared to JLR.
Then again, I remember a lot more VAG advertising in car magazines compared to JLR.
I really don't pay much attention to reviews, the main reasons being 1. A lot of what I like in a car is subjective so what the reviewer likes isn't really relevant, 2. A lot of the time I don't trust them to be unbiased and/or free of prejudices anyway, 3. They're often just bloody annoying bloviating blokes droning on for far longer than is necessary in an attempt to be the next Jeremy Clarkson.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff