Flatcapdriver

You could level the 'everday' accusation at all of the car magazines. The reason they have long termers is just that, to ascertain what the cars are like to live with.

The target audience for their readership is individuals who are interested in performance motor cars - simple as that. If I want to read about the towing capabilities of a vehicle, I'll pick up a copy of What Car? If I'm interested in more mainstream vehicles, I'll buy CAR magazine.

It comes back to my original point, which was that I tend to purchase performance cars and that is why I value the opinions of Evo as they broadly mirror my own. Their opinion of the Z4M, MINI Cooper S, Impreza, S2000 and going back into the mists of time the original Golf GTi and Peugeot 205 are the same as mine. Most I've liked, some I've had niggles about and one or two I bitterly regret buying.

If I want to get an informed opinion about my old Landy then I'll buy Land Rover World, not Evo. Its as simple as that.

Matteeboy

Fine - We both like cars, we both have a different approach.
I guess I'm just wary of relying on mags opinions and will always say if I've actually driven something, or just lifted it from a mag.

Dream Weaver

I only ever buy Evo if they have a hot hatch test, or some retro cars in. The rest of the time its aimed at the London City boys with the flash suits

Bores me to read about Porsches, Range Rovers, yadda yadda. I would imagine the Evo journo's are the same, never got their hands dirty with a car

Get PPC if you want a proper mag

Blueblaster

I think EVO do have a problem with their content. I have bought every copy and over the last few years the magazine has drifted too far towards exotica. Nowadays I find myself turning straight to the long term test section because that is the only place I can find information on cars I might actually buy. And even that section is starting to be dominated by the expensive stuff with the reviews of 'affordable' cars relegated to a footnote. The rest of the magazine has lost direction to the point where the supercar always wins. Look at this months bad weather group test. The best all round car is apparently a 4wd 911. What a surprise! Who in their right mind is going to take their 911 out in the worst weather of the year to enjoy the way it handles? Only a total plonker. The Subaru should have won - and remember I am saying this from an ANTI-Subaru perspective. I know they do review cheaper cars, but it always feels like they feel obliged to do it in between supercar jaunts around Europe.

On the subject of the letters page I find I have to totally disagree with Flatcapdriver. Track day motoring is not really covered in any mainstream mag and so it is natural for people to write in with specific questions. You can find the answer to any other question in Autocar et al. I do not think the number of letters about trackdays is proportional to the interests of the readership.

And one final point to get this back on topic. I now appreciate that the new CTR is too watered down compared to the old one so I am not blindly defending a car just because I loved my old one. However, how much reference did the article pay to value, design (not asthetics) and the overall ownership proposition. Sure, there may only be a 'few thousand' pounds difference in price, but in this market that equates to 10-15%. What other purchase would you make where that kind of price differential is totally ignored?

OK, I lied, this is my final point . How many people use their car in a way that makes the EVO road test criteria relevant? Very very few I bet. I have never explored the limits of my cars because it is too dangerous on the public road and everything that isn't nailed to the floor gets hurled around the cabin. I am looking for something that is good looking, nice to drive, easy to live with that won't let me down. That is what most people want, even if there are some Scoobynetters who want something more extreme.

I'm off to breakfast.

///\oo/\\\

Matt - stop being so defensive

Its not that hard to get a car to oversteer/understeer safely on the public road - especially in this weather. Handling traits are just evident at much lower speeds as you will know.

Your "I appreciate good handling over any other quality" comment is slightly at odds with your having owned a Mk4 R32 (traction yes, handling finess, no)and to a lesser extent current Astra (the focus is better), not to mention your love of the Mk3 Golf, but I would agree with the sentiment entirely.

Which is why my favourite owned cars of all time have been Mk2 Escort (an oversteering delight) original mini (utterly chuckable) Pug 2051.9 gti (sublime adjustibility) Integra DC2 (I've yet to find a better balanced front driver) and current 1 series BMW (fantastic balance).

Your comment is also somewhat at odds with your "150 bhp per tonne is not enough" post on this very thread though

And I agree with you on the magazine point.

A pinch of salt is definately required. Unfortunately, the criteria these days to be a road tester seems to be either having large amounts of money, or being in the right place at the right time. Their real skills appear to be literary, as you would expect from a magazine.

There are some exceptions, but when you read test reports full of technical and chassis dynamic inaccuracies, you really have to wonder if the writers really understand what is going on.

Its a lottery - some agree with my own personal experiences, some don't. C'est la vie

I would also be surprised if more than 5% of evo readers have ever been on a track day.

Flatcapdriver

Suggest some of you stop buying any publications aimed at the motoring public as clearly you're missing the point.

Matteeboy

Which is....?

Some good points posted above and all fair comments. I appear to be in the majority of opinion for once.

150bhp/tonne is not enough - Well not in the current hot hatch "wars" anyway.

The Astra is a pretty major compromise ands although much better than I ever thought it would be (I drove the Focus - The difference in handling is minimal and the Astra is quicker than the equivalent Focus and better made), I am under no illusions that it's some sort of hot hatch - I had to sell my hot hatch because it suffered repeated vandalism attacks trying to get the alloys - So the next car had to be near invisible.

Dream Weaver

What point? Evo is crap, its full of Porsches, adverts for crappy expensive watches, and articles about driving your £50k Porsche around a track, all things that don't interest me and I wouldn't waste my money on.

There is never anything nearly affordable in the mag for 95% of the population, unless spanking £20k on a "toy" is acceptable? It's purely a mag for car ****, and rather pointless IMO.

Only car mag I buy is PPC, as that appeals to me, getting my hands dirty with older cars.

Evo is aimed at city types with boy band haircuts, end of story

Matteeboy

Might have to get myself a copy of PPC methinks.

Flatcapdriver

For crying out loud, several posts ago you said you bought Evo when they had a group test for hot hatches and now you're denying ever buying it - talk about talking bollocks. The simple fact that you can't afford some of the cars featured doesn't make it crap, it merely means that you don't fit the demographics and consequently target audience and as such will miss the point of the magazine

If you can't afford a Civic Type R, Golf Gti, Renault Megane (all of which were featured in this month's issue) then I can see why the magazine wouldn't appeal to you but you probably didn't buy the magazine because you didn't like the outcome.

To complete the loop for the thickies who can't keep up, they tend to feature a lot of cars that I have owned over the years plus their opinions tend to coincide with my own which is why I use them as a sounding board for opinion making. I brought them up originally, as I was surprised that they slated the new Civic, although having driven the old one I can understand why given that it was a frustrating to drive as my old S2000 for real world driving. No doubt you will fail to understand what I mean by real world driving but there you go.

Matteeboy

Resorting to abuse and patronisation = Argument lost, credibility blown.

Oops.

///\oo/\\\

Indeed

Which is why I prefer to use patronisation on its own

Flatcapdriver

If the bloke can't afford the cars, then that is a statment of fact - not patronisation. If the bloke directly contradicts himself within the space of two posts then his intelligence is going to be questioned. If the bloke is going to bang on about city types with boy band haircuts, then clearly that would be patronising wouldn't it? Oh, no - you wouldn't want to accuse him of that because he's supporting your perspective isn't he?



Like you had any credibility to begin with.

Matteeboy

Flatcap - Put the kettle on, make a nice Horlicks, sit down and listen to Chill FM (I'm sure you have a DAB radio), take some deep breaths and repeat after me....


"WHATEVER"

Flatcapdriver

Ah, yes. Flummoxed by an adults' reasoning skills. Whatever - the last retort of a defeated teenager. Thank God I've never had kids.

Dream Weaver

I guess you're a city type with a boyband haircut then

I never mentioned not being able to afford them, I said affordable in general i.e. for the masses. I have a family, so have to spend the big money on a family car (which I just have and could have bought the hot hatches you mention in a flash but have to put the family first), then the rest on the weekend toy. I don't count a £50k Porsche as a weekend toy. My 205 is the weekend toy for now, and would have paid for a new hot hatch shortly as well but older cars are more rewarding

Your point was that Evo's opinions are matter of fact, they maybe for a person like yourself, probably not married, no kids as you mentioned, but in general they don't apply to 95% of the population.

Saying PPC is the only mag I buy, I mean the only one I buy monthly. I do buy Evo if it has a feature I like. The last issue I bought had the FWD test with the 205 GTI and Clio Williams.

Please enlighten us as to what "real world driving" is, I take it you live on a very different planet to the rest of us, or is real world driving taking your S2000 down to the local wine bar and flashing your Rolex and copy of Evo while re-living tales of hammering your Porsche around the Ring?

Matteeboy

Flatcap is just dying to tell us how well off he is, how successful his mates (if any) think he is and how no one comes close to touching his driving skills.

Seems rather common here on SN.

Oh well, at least he's not breeding.

///\oo/\\\

Thats a bit rich from you Matt

Flatcapdriver

Your story keeps changing so its hard to keep up. Every month,despite your assertion Evo has various articles on affordable cars such as Golfs, Civics etc etc. That is a fact which you cannot dispute although according to you they never feature these types of cars. They do, they have done and will continue to do so.

On one hand you completely dismiss their findings and on the other you state that you buy the magazine when it has a feature which you like - which is it? You cannot have it both ways. You also state that you're in the market for buying a family car and then completely ignore the fact that clearly the magazine isn't marketed towards you? There is no logic to your argument. You continually contradict yourself.

I have never stated that Evo's opinions are a matter of fact. I have stated that for the type of cars I buy, I value their opinion because they are realistic and honest about cars - as am I. I understand the benefits of each car I've owned or driven but I am honest enough to admit their weak points and am quite happy to do so, unlike the Scoobynet masses who believe that their car is infallible and capable of beating all others. Witness the bull**** surrounding the Impreza and the unwillingness to admit that the cars has shortcomings.

Case in point. I've got a Z4M which I chose above a Boxster S which is the better handling car but for me it lacked charisma but I perfectly understand why people would buy one. The S2000 was irritating beyond belief in that the lack of torque is a nuisance in real world driving situations - look at the in gear acceleration times from 70 - 90mph. That is not useful on a motorway - great engine for thrashing down a country lane but not especially good on either motorways or for driving round town which is what real world driving is all about. Funnily enough - Evo agree with that along with its lack of traction in greasy conditions.

I don't subscribe to the bull**** surrounding the MX5 which is one of the best handling cars of all time - again something Evo would agree with. The Boxster is a great car but you get these muppets that insist its a poor man's Porsche or some such bollocks. No, it isn't because its the entry model to the range and as such has the essential Porsche ingredients but people like to mock it mainly due to jealousy. The same with the 205, great car which occasionally had a tendency for vicious lift off oversteer but had to be one of the best handling FWD cars ever but it was ruined by just the type of people you're sneering at now - City types who bought and trashed them by trying to drive them inappropriately. Also I was never that impressed with the electrics on mine.

All of the cars mentioned I've had personal experience of and pretty much all I've said about them tends to coincide with the opinion of Evo which is why I tend to take notice of what they say. That doesn't mean I'll buy pretty much anything they praise but I do value their opinion in much the same way I do my wife's - doesn't neccessarily mean I'll follow it though, just similar perspectives.

So no, I don't drive my S2000 (binned it years ago) to the wine bar (prefer bitter) whilst flashing my Rolex (don't wear a watch, although I had a fake one twenty years ago - does that count?) whilst recounting tales of thrashing my Porsche (haven't owned one) round the 'ring (only been once and it was in an Impreza).

Does that answer your question?

Dream Weaver

It does answer my question, much nicer when you type a reply without the anger, patronisation and name calling

Evo is still for toffs though, always has been IMO

Flatcapdriver

Ah, I understand now. You're from up North. One of the ones with a chip on your shoulder - that explains it.



Not anger. Just a low tolerance for stupidity. Still, at least you now understand where you've been contradicting yourself.



Suggest you read this month's Evo to see why they've slated the Civic in the Group Test. Oh, hang on - I forgot you don't read Evo. Oops, got that wrong - you only read Evo when they've got a Group Test with hot hatches. Hang on, that being the case why haven't you read this month's issue as its featuring a Group Test with said Hot Hatches? Oh, I remember - because they're 'not affordable'? No, no - got that wrong. They don't feature affordable cars - only Porsches. But Dreamweaver's just admitted that they do feature affordable cars...

Confused? Well, you've certainly confused us?

Matteeboy

Flatcap - I have to hand it to you - That was a funny post!

Now where is my first bloody subscription issue of Evo?!

Flatcapdriver

Look, lets just draw a line under this as its clear that we buy magazines as well as cars for different reasons depending on whether they appeal to us or not.

The only likely thing we'll agree on is the the 205 was/is a great car. Just unfortunate its French.

Dream Weaver

I said i'd buy it if it included older hatches, 205, Clio, ITR etc not the newer ones.

I'll have a flick through it tonight though just for you Flatcap, and I reckon it may just have articles about a Porsche, maybe a TVR, possibly a comparison of two £80k supercars on a nice sunny Welsh road, with text by the likes of Henry Catchpole etc.

GrantyBoy

Is this post about EVO magazine or the new Civic Type R?????

Flatcapdriver

I was right, I knew it. Your dislike of the magazine is nothing to do with the content - its simply a class issue for you. The mention of Henry Catchpole gave you away in the end whose the original posh chappy, that and the continual mention of 'city types', wine bars, toffs and city boys.

If you'd only said this at the beginning, you could have saved us all a lot of trouble. The angst you must be feeling seeing all those fantastic cars that you can't afford. Get over it, if I see some lucky git with a decent car it simply makes me want to work harder so that I can have one - not get all bitter and twisted about it.



The English never cease to amaze me with their class ridden stereotypes.

Flatcapdriver

It was originally about the Type R but when I expressed surprise that Evo had slated it in a Hot Hatch Group Test, which Evo never conduct because they only talk about cars that little rich kids can afford, it turned into an anti-Evo slag fest.

Mainly because certain individuals didn't like the fact that Evo didnt' rate it I reckon - not that anyone would admit that.

Dream Weaver

What a laugh What's your nationality then pray tell?

I have no class stereotypes at all, just not keen on pretentious types thats all, a bloke driving a Ferrari in everyday jeans make me quite happy, a city boy in a Golf tailgating everyone makes me laugh. I don't aspire to anything other than happiness, and my life is great at the minute.

Just read said Evo issue and the hatch article. Although the conclusion on the Type R against the others doesn't put it in the lead, it doesn't get slated enough to stop me buying one.
As for your continual "you can't afford" postings (give me a break is your dad richer then mine as well? ). I could afford any car I wanted within reason, but i'm too tight to waste money on cars and doing only 1k miles a year I prefer to invest my cash rather than lose it in a car that wouldn't be used

As for the rest of this months Evo, yawn

Blueblaster

Flatcapdriver, let me try and summarise what people are saying. I'll try and use words that don't wind you up so that hopefully the red mist doesn't cloud the issues.

If you look at the way the population of this country is structured you will see that the majority of men have a family, a dog or hobbies that require them to have practical transport. The requirements of these commitments dictate which cars are suitable. Many of us could afford a 911 or something similar, but the need to make sound financial and logistical decisions means that the responsible family man has to choose something more mundane. This, however, does not mean that he has to choose something boring. What he needs is 4/5 doors, a boot and hopefully a dash of excitement.

Now, just to illustrate the financial realities of family life, think about these typical costs of living in the South East and not in wallet-friendly Lancashire.

Typical house price £250,000 (£150,000 mortgage = £800/month)
Council Tax = £150/month
Utilities = £150/month
Food for family of 4 = £800/month
Annual family holiday = £200/month
3 year, £10k car loan = £300/month
Diesel @15,000miles/year = £150/month
Car insurance = £50/month

These are just basic costs and don't include, pensions, savings, private school fees, medical insurance, clothes, dentist, house maintenance, car maintenance, leisure activites.....and yet the total is already £2,600. This works out at about £4,000 before tax which is £48,000 per year and our fictional family is hardly living extravagently. If you earnt double this figure it would still very quickly disappear. So to say that the disappointment about EVO's content is down to class/income envy is not true. The problem with EVO is that it spends too long testing millionaire's toys and not enough time showing the average UK male the best way to enjoy motoring in family-friendly transport.

To illustrate, lets look at this month's EVO. The "Driven" section features:
Prodrive Aston V8 Vantage
Porsche Cayenne Turbo
Weltmeister Trophy Exige
Impreza STI Spec C Type RA-R
Toniq-R Duratec
BMW 335-Convertible
Morego BBR Focus ST280
Vauxhall Vectra VXR
Fiat Bravo 1.9 MultiJet

Out of all of those the only realistic purchase for Mr Average is the Fiat. The Focus and VXR maybe at a push although £25k plus high insurance, road tax and terrible mpg probably rule them out. Other features in the mag include:
Alfa 8C
Audi R8
"The cost of running supercars"
TVR Typhon
A hot hatch group test.

So in the whole mag I get information on a Fiat diesel and a hot hatch group test that places a heavy emphasis on on-track performance. EVO is about "The Thrill of Driving". It would be nice to know how to capture this thrill in a real world car.

Did this help change your mind?

Chris L

Well if you want to read about 'normal cars' - go and read a different mag (although testing 17 grand hot hatches is hardly fantasy league stuff)!

A couple of things about the Evo article - it was written by John Barker - one of the most talented journo/drivers ever. I've always found him to be pretty spot on about his cars. He's not afraid to say what he thinks either. I would value his opinion above most other motoring journos.

The lap times quoted earlier by Chris were on a wet track at Bedford. The Renault's time was only 2.5 seconds off the dry lap of the Golf R32 - that's pretty impressive!

I'm undecided about the new Honda and having driven the Megane 225, I would have to seriously consider the new R26. Renault's less than fantastic reliability record does concern me somewhat though!

CTR new hot hatch king? I think Renault would have an awful lot to say about that!