Archive for The Motor Forum "We are mature men in the highest cadres of our careers"
 


       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> Read All About It
Tim

EVO 225

Ah, all is right with the world again.

After a clear glitch where the Mustang was chosen over the BMW M4 a retest has been had and the M235 now beats the Mustang.

I look forward to the 235 vs M4 test with the latter getting 2 stars (unlikely....).

Richard Meaden is a twat - complaining in his regular column about the excessive power of superheated estates, saloons, etc having noted in the previous paragraph that the majority of the cars they test can now get to 100 in under 10 seconds.
STOP TESTING THOSE CARS THEN YOU IDIOT  

There are plenty of more sensible alternatives.

Also, why did they test a roadgoing McLaren P1 GTR and have a long feature about the work going into making the Aston Vulcan a roadcar - costing £340k+VAT on top of whatever it costs to actually buy one on the first place.


Finally, congrats to one of our own on the letters page  
Stuntman

Re Meaden - I see his point, which is in response to vehicles like the M4 and the 718 as much as it is about the superheated estates etc.  And evo is a magazine with a relatively narrow focus, on the performance end of the spectrum.  As a subscriber and one who has every issue of the magazine in my porn library, I don't want them to test the sensible alternatives

I noticed the letter-writer too.  Poor form really, there was no mention of the car or cars he owned...
Tim

I see Meaden's point too but he's hardly in a position to complain about it when he must be one of the senior members of staff - if he pushed them towards slightly more sensible stuff you must assume they'd listen to him.

I feel like writing a letter telling them how the only one of my cars I feel I can drive to the limit is the Fiat Coupe and how my M5 and 370Z are just too fast.
Obviously I'd have to 'improve' them to current M5 and a GT-R for the purposes of the EVO letters page  
Blarno

Is Evo still a Queefy sausage-fest BMW love in?
Stuntman

Slightly.  But the photography is very good, and the road trip type of stories and historical features are certainly worth reading.
Tim

Stuntman wrote:
Slightly. †But the photography is very good, and the road trip type of stories and historical features are certainly worth reading.


They had moved on from BMW to Porsche but it's been relatively free of those for a month or 2.

CAR mag, however, have picked up that baton in the latest issue  
PhilD

Re: EVO 225

Tim wrote:

Richard Meaden is a twat - complaining in his regular column about the excessive power of superheated estates, saloons, etc having noted in the previous paragraph that the majority of the cars they test can now get to 100 in under 10 seconds.
STOP TESTING THOSE CARS THEN YOU IDIOT †



Having a bad week Tim?! Nothing wrong with Meaden's piece, in fact it makes a lot of sense.
Tim

I agree it makes perfect sense, I've been thinking the same for a while now.

However, he is a twat because as a senior staff member he will have a say in what cars they choose to test so he must have influence over the fact that "the majority of cars we test can get to 100 in under 10 seconds".
So, he's part of the problem he's complaining about.
That's all.

I actually like his writing in general as it's usually devoid of Queefisms.
It's just his column that annoyed me this month.

And no, I'm not having a bad day/week  
Frank Bullitt

Tim wrote:
Stuntman wrote:
Slightly. †But the photography is very good, and the road trip type of stories and historical features are certainly worth reading.


They had moved on from BMW to Porsche but it's been relatively free of those for a month or 2.

CAR mag, however, have picked up that baton in the latest issue †


Yes, it certainly feels like a BMW and Porsche pro-mo this month, add in the 'BMW special' last month and it all gets a bit tedious
Alf McQueef

The M6 "buying used" article was interesting. Just like with the V10 M5's one, it put me off them entirely! Regular engine failures at well sub 100k mileages are something of a major worry - and repair costs eye-watering. As are running costs generally. The only surprise to me was that the clunky transmission is allegedly strong.

I know some people seem to think anything genuinely quick - especually quick and heavy and complex - will cost the earth to run and they are all the same, but they very much are not. On the one side you have these V10 beemers, Panameras, Massers and so on - on the other, E63 AMG's, XFR's and others, just as well reviewed at the time but now cheaper to buy and much cheaper to run.

It seems a bit hard to explain in the case of the BMW's (massive Maserati and Porsche running costs are somewhat less surprising). I wonder if the engine's oil thirst means many are run low on oil, causing the failures. That was a big Alfa issue in the old days. That could explain it, maybe they are well engineered but need careful care - which if buying SH, can't be assured. Or maybe the V10 was used so little, it was never really ironed out.
gooner

I can't remember the specifics but I'm sure I read at the time that the S85 V10 engine was spun off of the BMW F1 program, which may go some way to explaining why it's more highly strung and potentially fragile than the V8 engines in some of its rivals.
Twelfth Monkey

Got back from holiday today and am vain & arrogant enough to wonder if it was my F1 missive!

Had a gutted letter in Autocar this week too, which was putting the boot into a fool who said that manuals were fashion trinkets, then in a later letter that they were for the poor.  Mine makes little sense now.

And Phil might have seen the 'thought experiment' in the last Focus, about how high you can jump on different planetary bodies.  I'm sure that's based upon a question I sent in that wasn't used in Q&A.


Bow before me, O editorial types...
PhilD

Tim wrote:
I agree it makes perfect sense, I've been thinking the same for a while now.

However, he is a twat because as a senior staff member he will have a say in what cars they choose to test so he must have influence over the fact that "the majority of cars we test can get to 100 in under 10 seconds".
So, he's part of the problem he's complaining about.
That's all.

I actually like his writing in general as it's usually devoid of Queefisms.
It's just his column that annoyed me this month.

And no, I'm not having a bad day/week †


good to hear!    I've read it again and I think you are missing the point. He's not saying there are better drives to be found with the more sensible stuff but that performance cars generally are sacrificing enjoyment at lower speeds for the never ending quest for power and high speed.
Tim

Sorry Phil, I think you're missing my point.

If he's complaining that a majority of the cars they get in to test are too fast to use properly (I didn't say they weren't fun to drive...) then why isn't he pushing the rest of his colleagues in the editorial team to have less top end superheated cars and more of the lower order stuff?

I know they have to test the latest models but there are articles where they choose what to test.

If EVO is about the thrill of driving then have they ever compared, say, a standard 520D (i.e. one that's not been specced up with ludicrously wide 20 inch tyres) driven flat out against an M5 being driven at the same speeds?

I know they did a 1 litre hire car test years ago but that was a one-off wasn't it?


12th, I was referring to the F1 letter.
Nice Guy Eddie

To be fair to Evo they really don't promote big power and have been going on about weight and high power over fun for some time. Asking them to boycott the latest Audi RS6 launch as some form of protest to excess power seems a bit daft as the punters still ant to read about the cars.

ECOTYs an example where Porsches always/usually come out on top due to handling and zero to do with power.
Tim

I'm not suggesting they should boycott any launches at all, that would be stupid but when they're doing comparison tests perhaps they could have a larger sprinkling of more affordable stuff.

That's all.

On the Porsche subject I remember the ECOTY test where the 997 GT3 RS (I think it was that version, the test was in France) won.
They were negative about the car the whole way through on the basis that it was quite unresponsive at sensible speeds but gave it the win based on a final night balls-out run back to the hotel.
Not a great reason in my opinion, however it IS something they've been saying about a lot of cars for quite a while now.

Wasn't it James Hunt who had some 1950s van* as a runabout so he could take it to the limit all the time?




*He was also skint which may have been a factor  
Twelfth Monkey

Tim, the 'vain and arrogant' bit is because I didn't know whether they had published it as we were on hols - obviously they should have done...
Giant

I'd had a 6month trial of Evo for £5. I'm not a huge fan of the magazine, but for that price it seemed too cheap not to.

I had a call today from the publishers saying they had tried to take the next quarters (full priced) direct debit and noticed I had cancelled it. They asked why etc. After they explained I didn't like the magazine enough to pay full price for it, they offered me a further 3months for £1! Naturally I accepted, but I just can't see how that makes any sense to them at all! The guy on the phone even advised me to cancel the new DD after the £1 is taken (which I would have done anyway) to avoid paying full price next quarter!
Tim

It's worth their while because they'll print, say, 250,000 copies.
100,000 will be for full price subscribers and the rest will go to shops.
Any remaining unsold in shops will be returned to the publisher and binned.
So, even if they only get 33.3 pence per copy from you it's better than getting nothing - your copy will mean one less in the shops.
Twelfth Monkey

Twelfth Monkey wrote:
Had a gutted letter in Autocar this week too, which was putting the boot into a fool who said that manuals were fashion trinkets, then in a later letter that they were for the poor. †Mine makes little sense now.


And the fool in question has now had a third swipe at the manual (and me), which is now for the YouTube poseur. †Have demanded right to reply, but fear I won't get it.

       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> Read All About It
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum