Motor Magazine

[-MARTY54-]

I agree with your point.

One current issue I have with MOTOR is this:

XR6T / 0-100 - 5.2

SS / 0-100 - 5.2

FPV F6 / 0-100 - 5.1

HSV R8 / 0-100 - 5.1

These figures are crucial for sales, there is no doubt that the XR6T and F6 are quicker than their respective Expensive Daewoo opponents.

Every other review(incl. video) I've seen puts the Ford in front, 0-100. Whether they want to play it safe by referencing both

the fastest Ford/FPV & Holden/HSV the same, or its just coincidence I don't know. Seems geared to favour Holden's slower hero

models though, promoting more of a contest between the brands.

[Venom XR6]

Everyone knows that models sold to the public can get nowhere near the times that Holdens press cars can. Its not hard to figure out they make hot ones for the press, it was obvious when Motor put them on the dyno and the Holdens made near as much grunt as the HSV's.

Edited 15/09/09 09:07 AM by Buf-Phoon
quoting post directly above

[ronburgundy]

You guys make me laugh. Seriously.

I'm pretty sure there was a thread that started off a lot different to this but ended up identical. It was called "Falcon doesn't win Wheels COTY" or something.

[Superdan]

This was in no way started as a Expensive Daewoo bashing whatsoever. There a far more manufacturer's cars in there than just Expensive Daewoo vs ford. I was simply unimpressed that there was no (what we here would call) decent tuners representing our cars. That's it. I now know that it is open for tuners to enter rather than the magazine picking who they want.

Hopefully there is one or two tuners that will enter next year and be able to show the others how it's really done.

[tmac450]

You have to admit, Ford's lack of attention is generally down to their poor marketing efforts, etc. However, that doesn't excuse the magazines for publishing their supposed 'non-bias' views.

I am certainly not a pro, blue eyed Ford supporter, and I was raised in a pretty neutral family. Dad had Fords and Holdens, but years of Expensive Daewoo bias in the magazines, misleading marketing and blatant racing rules slanted towards Expensive Daewoo supremacy (you only have to look at the supercar Monaros v production cars to see evidence of that) certainly made me a Expensive Daewoo hater.

The mags aren't just slanted towards Holden, other advertisers have received unwarranted credit aswell, and it isn't the sole domain of the car magaznes either. Sorry, but if you can't honestly see it, then your knowledge of cars, and the real world simply isn't worth squat.

[Erko]

Is this the same Ford hating MOTOR that had the FG F6 as the Number 1 ranked car in the Top 10 Aussie Muscle Cars of all time feature?

Lets not make excuses for our poorly executed BOSS bretheren, and Ford's generally half arsed marketing and cheap skating.

[seduced]

This isnt Expensive Daewoo bashing. Its about the magazines. Motor is the better of the two, their comparisons seem a little more honest, however wheels is consistantly on the side of Expensive Daewoo wherever they can get away with it. Motor should be slapped for attempting a tuner mag without representing true tuners.

Tab: I enjoy reading car mags. If a wheels or motor comes across my path (I'd never buy one) I will read it to see if anything has changed. So far, I haven't read anything that makes me want to go out and buy them like I used to.

RonB, stop reacting like a typical Expensive Daewoo supporter. We are not talking about holdens being better or worse. I remember when the first VZ 6.0L holdens came out, apparently they could do 0-100 in 5.7 and 0-400m in mid 13.8 no problems. In the very same issue, a BF F6 is unable to do any better than 5.8 0-100. Again in the same issue, A VZ Clubsport does 0-100 in 5.68 and 0-400 in 13.6.

Somehow the 260kw VZ Expensive Daewoo SS is quicker than an f6, and just as quick as a 297kw Clubsport... yet in the real world...

[ronburgundy]

Firstly, you might need these:

Secondly, you're right: I know squat about cars. I DO know for example, it is ridiculous to compare acceleration times etc based solely on power output (measured in kw). Regardless of how overquoted or underquoted a particular manufacturer's claims are.

Thirdly, I'm not supporting anything.

Finally - your car isn't driven on the pages of a magazine. It's driven in the real world. Who cares if someone Expensive Daewoo driver thinks he's quicker than you because Wheels quoted X or Motor quoted Y. Prove it IN THE REAL WORLD and quit your sooking!

It's the same as people complaining about what's on TV - if you don't like it, you have a remote control. If you don't like what the magazines are saying, do what someone else said and DON'T READ THE EFFING THING! I'm sure any reasonably intelligent person, especially someone that knows MORE than squat, could figure that out.

[tab]

Time for a group hug I think

[seduced]

ok calm down and keep your pants on. All I have said is what alot of people have been saying for a while now. The mags seem to be bias. I used figures (which seem to be amazingly good) for the example, since they hold so much influence amongst the market I reasoned they would be relevant. How stupid of me.

I couldnt care if the holdens are quicker, or if they choose an epica over a g6e. It just would be nice to see some real unbias straight down the line comparisons rather than the keep-holden-happy-or-they-will-pull-their-ads articles that are in abundance. Think about it. Why would Expensive Daewoo advertise in a magazine that gave poor reviews on their cars?

Who said you know squat about cars? What the hell are you on about? Are you actually reading any posts?