MotorTrend Blog: BRZ handling "better than Porsche, Godzilla and the McLaren"

[blu_]

Originally Posted by Bristecom

I've driven some pretty fast cars but the problem I find is that they are either a little too heavy or too big. They are designed to be stable at 150 mph, not to be whipped around little corners at 30 mph. So yeah, to some extent I believe them that the BRZ handles better. However, they probably could have said the same for other similar cars.

Yeah that's the problem with a lot of performance cars.

[Sport-Tech]

Originally Posted by Dimman

It didn't beat the GT-R, the editor just said it handled better. Bit on the GT-R says it was third fastest they ever tested on the figure 8.

I know which of the two attributes I want.

[random]

Originally Posted by blu_

Im just saying take what most auto journalists have to say with a grain of salt. I've read too many times about cars considered to be perfect by them, only to have to greatly criticizing the cars flaws a few years down the line when the new competitor comes out.

Has it ever been proved that there are auto journalists and/or auto magazines who get paid by car manufacturers to give praise to their new vehicles? I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case because it would explain why I never see a journalist write completely terrible things about a car. If they ever did, then they'd stop getting kick backs from the auto manufacturer.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by random

Has it ever been proved that there are auto journalists and/or auto magazines who get paid by car manufacturers to give praise to their new vehicles? I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case because it would explain why I never see a journalist write completely terrible things about a car. If they ever did, then they'd stop getting kick backs from the auto manufacturer.

Chris Harris did write something terrible about Ferrari.

[Kimsey47]

Subaru and Toyota are going to be broke with all those payouts then!

[DeepHunta]

Good thing rear tires are the same as the front....so if the rear goes bald after a good thrashing in the track, then just switch the front with the rear, and you're good to go again for more power sliding fun!

The media is hyping it up waaaay too much. I'm just gonna wait for the Top Gear UK review. Hopefully, Jeremy will shed some light into this. Although, Top Gear UK has already had first drive impressions of this car and they like it a lot! End of June is the likely showing of the new series.

[blu_]

Originally Posted by Dark

Chris Harris did write something terrible about Ferrari.

Actually this is a good point for my case... As he will never be invited to test a new Ferrari ever again.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by blu_

Actually this is a good point for my case... As he will never be invited to test a new Ferrari ever again.

It just shows that what he said was right.

[Kiwi]

Originally Posted by blu_

Actually this is a good point for my case... As he will never be invited to test a new Ferrari ever again.

Which Ferrari was it?

[blu_]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

Which Ferrari was it?

All of them. He basically said they give reviewers obviously tuned from stock cars to get better reviews. It was on jalopnik and is a good read.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

Which Ferrari was it?

All of them. Ferrari is apparently very selective and controlling with their 'production' cars. Has been since the 80's if I remember an article about the 'US-spec' Quattrovalvo that C&D tested. The 'production' car that Ferrari supplied was almost a second faster in the 1/4 mile and like almost .1g better on the skidpad than a real one sourced from an American dealer. The Harris article goes into how Ferrari controls the 'independant' testing by providing specific cars for specific tests. They don't take one car and do all testing on it. They take the car that Ferrari tells them for a specific test.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by Dimman

All of them. Ferrari is apparently very selective and controlling with their 'production' cars. Has been since the 80's if I remember an article about the 'US-spec' Quattrovalvo that C&D tested. The 'production' car that Ferrari supplied was almost a second faster in the 1/4 mile and like almost .1g better on the skidpad than a real one sourced from an American dealer. The Harris article goes into how Ferrari controls the 'independant' testing by providing specific cars for specific tests. They don't take one car and do all testing on it. They take the car that Ferrari tells them for a specific test.

They don't allow mags to borrow cars from owners for the test either. Every about the test is controlled by Ferrari themselves. They don't let mag publish any comparison test that Ferrari came out the worst or close to the worst. In short, the Ferrari cars tested by Mags, is not the same spec as what's at the dealership.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Dark

They don't allow mags to borrow cars from owners for the test either. Every about the test is controlled by Ferrari themselves. They don't let mag publish any comparison test that Ferrari came out the worst or close to the worst. In short, the Ferrari cars tested by Mags, is not the same spec as what's at the dealership.

Yeah, forgot about that. Ties into that 80s test I mentioned. They ripped on Ferrari pretty hard about truth. Didn't actually call them liars but pretty close. Now with the customer car testing ban (and no way a dealer will lend them a car any more either) the only way for a mag to find out the truth is to buy their own, and that's not going to happen.

[Kunzite]

Originally Posted by Capt Canuck

Indeed and a key 'real world' benchmark for those of us who spend hours driving continually around the same cloverleaf highway exit for kicks

"All right, dear. Have you finally figured out which shoe store should we go next?"
It can happen!