"Spaze" (spazegun2213)
10/27/2014 at 19:48 • Filed to: None
3
13|
"Spaze" (spazegun2213)
10/27/2014 at 19:48 • Filed to: None | 3
| 13 |
I will be the first to admit that, recently, I've been a little tired of the usual automotive journalist. You know exactly who I'm talking about, they're the ones that describe a Lincolns steering feedback as "tactile", or a Buicks brake pedal as "firm and unwavering" during repeated abuse. These journalists probably haven't driven anything interesting in the last 20 years, yet their articles still get published. This is the main reason I stopped reading many of the classic automotive magazines. Instead I try to get my news from places like Jalopnik, The Smoking Tire, Drive (when it was free), and, yes, Top Gear. I think I finally understand why, after watching The Smoking Tire's video reviews at the Motor Press Guild's annual track day.
I recently queued up The Smoking Tire's review of the Ford Mustang EcoBoost. I enjoyed Matt's very candid commentary on the car and that led me to watch other videos from the same track today. It occurred to me that while watching videos, Matt is a pretty capable wheelman (which I had suspected for a while) and that every other journalist on track sucked. Their lines were terrible, their point-bys were lacking and it reminded me of teen driving schools I've instructed. Sure, not every car that track day is capable on track, but it was clear to see most of the problems were lack of driving ability.
So this has me thinking, how can I believe anything written by someone who is terrible at driving? Would you take the word of a contractor who's website has pictures of shoddy looking houses? I realize asking this is subjective, but I tend to trust people that are good at what they do. This is the reason I like reading things from Randy Pobst, and Tommy Kendall and others that were paid to drive for a living. Sure they are now commentators/writers/Show hosts, but these positions stemmed from them chasing perfection in the drivers seat. I would venture to say that most journalists lack that type of credibility behind the wheel.
Now, I'm not saying every automotive journalist sucks at driving. But I am saying that magazines would probably be better off hiring ex-professional racers, and a few good editors.
Here is a picture of an m4 in the wet for reading that wall of text.
CB
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 19:51 |
|
Are we also going to discredit auto journalists who suck at building cars?
Brian Silvestro
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 19:52 |
|
This is why Motortrend is so good.
Dat Randy Pobst though
Will with a W8 races an E30
> CB
10/27/2014 at 19:53 |
|
Nope, just gloss over the obvious inaccuracies with a "WTF?" and go to the trade journals/manufacturer publications for the technical bits.
Blue 300
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 19:55 |
|
Here's what I love more.
When you're talking to an "enthusiast" and they quote one of those "sucky" journalists verbatim. Yet they act as if they formed that opinion on their own after furiously testing the limits of said Buick at Laguna Seca.
whoarder is tellurium
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 19:56 |
|
I totally dig pro driver laps and review from Randy Pobst at Motortrend. So much win.
WesBarton89 - The Way to Santa Fe
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 19:59 |
|
That's a good point. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say (with no true knowledge of this to speak of) that a lot of the people that read/follow these reviews, tests, etc. don't truly care about those particular aspects, and are not true enthusiasts. They're "armchair" car guys. The true enthusiasts will read Jalopnik, as well as the others listed above, because they know that they actually care about this stuff. The other stuff is automotive fluff. Now, I will admit, I do read some other articles online, but it just doesn't do what Jalopnik, etc. does for me. Automotive journalism is a joke, for the most part. At least there's still a few gems out there.
lone_liberal
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 20:00 |
|
While certain writers can't hit an apex to save their lives if they can communicate the street driving characteristics of the car to their audience accurately then they are worth reading. After all, their audience is probably not going to take that car on a track either. It's the guys who have never met a car they wouldn't pimp for, usually seen in your local paper paid for from the ad department, that need to go away.
Fred (FreddsterExprs)
> Spaze
10/27/2014 at 20:02 |
|
Maybe there's a good side to F1 becoming so hard to get in without south-american bags of money: all the GP2 and F3 talent might find a job in the car magazine industry, replacing people who have no idea what they are doing behind the wheel.
Btw, that's why I love Sport Auto so much, their lead journalists are 24h and VLN class winners.
Jeff-God-of-Biscuits
> CB
10/27/2014 at 22:21 |
|
You don't have to be able to build a car to take the measure of it's driving characteristics. It's like being tone deaf and a music reviewer.
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> Spaze
10/30/2014 at 12:31 |
|
It depends. If they're reviewing an M4, maybe not. But if they're reviewing a Ford Fusion, chances are they are talking about how it performs in the real world compared to other normal cars.
wafflesnfalafel
> Spaze
05/09/2015 at 00:04 |
|
I think you’ve got two different things here. There are folks that are genetically predispositioned to be awesome drivers, (Randy Pobst, Vettel, Schumacher, etc for example.) I don’t think a journalist needs to be one of those folks. But they should know how to drive well - the learned technical skills. A good metaphor might be a golf journalist - we don’t expect them to be a championship golfer, but we do want them to know the technical skills of golfing.
jbm0866
> Spaze
07/22/2015 at 22:05 |
|
Unless we’re talking real sports cars and not just “sporty” versions of ordinary cars...I don’t think the track skill level of the reviewer matters that much. Lately I’ve started to dig some of the low/no budget youtube reviewers who give an actual detailed real world reviews of a variety of cars. Unlike the guys at the big time car mags, tehy don’t have every new make/model available to them, or a large fleet of long term cars, so they tend to be very detailed with what they get their hands on...and not jaded by having new cars every week.
On the flipside of that, you have outfits like Motorweek (mad respect for how long they’ve been going) that seem to desperately find all the good points of every car they test, while softballing any flaws. Guess they’re afraid of pissing off certain car companies..
Ike B
> Spaze
07/28/2015 at 22:13 |
|
I agree to a point, but if automotive journalism goes the same way as the motorcycle magazines, every writing job gets taken by ex racers. They already had their fun (and maybe got paid a mint for it too). That leaves no room for journalists who really love cars but couldn’t afford to become a racecar driver (or didn’t have a dad who bought them a racing kart when they were 10).