I think the car choices are a natural fit, b/c many sports car buyers in that price range will cross-shop all 3 cars. I have no prob. w/ their choice of the winner, as mag. test writers have opinions, just like we do. My ego or love for my car won't be affected by how they voted, and it shouldn't change yours.

I think it's quite funny how everyone will cheer when the S2000 wins a comparo, but moan when it loses. We should by happy to be enlighted that we get the appeal of this car, when the general public doesn't.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by nastinupe1
...

 

So... the winner of the convertibles is the loser of the fun cars. If this were the BCS then the RX-8 would beat the Audi TT, 350 Z Convertible, SLK, and Boxster as well.

 

I agree with the assessment of MT as the least respectable car mag. been saying that a looooong time.
for this comparo
Quick2k

 

who cares what they think, we all know we got the better car

 

Damn Straight, blademan! Does anyone read a magazine and enjoy their car any less the next day, no matter what the fishwrap says? I don't.

I write for some audio mags, and once got called from some whack job in California who said he was "nearly suicidal" because I found a technical design flaw in his speakers - HIS SPEAKERS for cryin' out loud!

We in the journalism game say "Those who live by the good review, die by the bad one". Get thy priorities in order.

One mag I wrote for did not take any advertising, some did. I can say with all honesty that i never held back or gushed over a product because they ran ads. There are audio magazines where I know that the mfrs' slide equipment to them on "permanent loan", but I buy what I kjeep, although at accomodation pricing.

Permament loan - is that creative or what?

 

First, I don't get to defend MT too often as I consider it a rung below fish wrap. And if they did pick the RX8 due to it having a back seat, well, I definitely see your point. However...

I for one would consider all three of these when shopping for a ~$30K sports car. So a comparison would not only be reasonable in my book, but useful and one I would definitely have asked for (just not in MT!). Where I'd like to see them compared is in the areas for which they were likely paired in the first place: ie performance related.

Not everyone has the same limited shopping list. It is okay to compare apples and oranges if you are shopping for fruit.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCGuy
First, I don't get to defend MT too often as I consider it a rung below fish wrap.

 

 

yeah, MT doesn't rack up points as neatly or overtly as C&D or R&T.

MT's Car / Truck of the year competitions are so ridiculous it's not even funny.

I subscribe to both C&D and R&T.

Quick2k