Most of you probably remember the most recent IFCAR comparo (full-size SUVs), and here's the entry-lux sedan group:
http://ifcar.net/reviews.comparisons.entryluxes.htm (http://ifcar.net/reviews.comparisons.entryluxes.htm)
This comparison did not include exclusive criteria, and 26 cars were included (though six were simply different versions of cars already included. I am not going to be fielding comments about the reasoning behind including almost everything that fell within the $29,000-$35,000 price range, it is explained on the comparison's main page.
The comparison itself should be complete, and let me know if you find errors either in content or with the site. Many links outside of the comparison do not work, but everything important to the comparison itself should.
If you have questions, please ask. If you disagree with anything, please bring it up for an INTELLIGENT debate (IE not "Well, I thought this should have been in first place, and I saw another comparison that agrees with me, so you're wrong.") I know it's long, but please read through at least the introduction and conclusion for each car instead of just looking at the order, which won't tell you very much. If you see errors (in either content or with the site) please let me know. And, as noted, I don't think I need to discuss the reasoning behind choosing not to separate the cars into distinct groups, for the reasons already explained on the site.
If this is the first time you've come across an IFCAR comparo, you can check out the other six at http://ifcar.net/reviews.comparisons.htm (http://ifcar.net/reviews.comparisons.htm). Also, I've recently been phasing in the standard Reviews section of this site, and have worked through compact and subcompact sedans, and you can take a look at those here http://ifcar.net/reviews.all.htm (http://ifcar.net/reviews.all.htm).
BTW, it costs money to run a site, so if viewers could please click on a few ads, I'd appreciate it.
That should cover everything, so enjoy!
The 9th place link doesnt work.
Thanks, missed that one. It works now from the Introduction page, and should soon be working from the other pages.
That was long, I read the intro went over the vehicle details then quickly mushing through the places then the evaluation. My car came in 20th, oh well it works for us. That's such a broad spectrum you have there the apples and oranges are over the place. It seemed well written and looked pretty good to me.
9th place
Also, when I click on 4th Place, it gives me the 5th place winner.
QuoteThat was long, I read the intro went over the vehicle details then quickly mushing through the places then the evaluation. My car came in 20th, oh well it works for us. That's such a broad spectrum you have there the apples and oranges are over the place. It seemed well written and looked pretty good to me.
9th place
Thanks. When did you buy?
QuoteAlso, when I click on 4th Place, it gives me the 5th place winner.
I'll get to that now.
QuoteQuoteThat was long, I read the intro went over the vehicle details then quickly mushing through the places then the evaluation. My car came in 20th, oh well it works for us. That's such a broad spectrum you have there the apples and oranges are over the place. It seemed well written and looked pretty good to me.
9th place
Thanks. When did you buy?
Pre redesign in late 03, I do like the wheels on mine better than the new ones though. I really enjoy the little car and if you wind it out you can make it move nicely. If you keep the rpms down you can get 32-38 mpg but for spirited 4k and above it drops to about 15-19. We've had great luck with it so far and we drive the hell out of it. I think it's approaching 70k miles now, that's why we are going to pick the wife up a new car in early 06.
QuoteQuoteQuoteThat was long, I read the intro went over the vehicle details then quickly mushing through the places then the evaluation. My car came in 20th, oh well it works for us. That's such a broad spectrum you have there the apples and oranges are over the place. It seemed well written and looked pretty good to me.
9th place
Thanks. When did you buy?
Pre redesign in late 03, I do like the wheels on mine better than the new ones though. I really enjoy the little car and if you wind it out you can make it move nicely. If you keep the rpms down you can get 32-38 mpg but for spirited 4k and above it drops to about 15-19. We've had great luck with it so far and we drive the hell out of it. I think it's approaching 70k miles now, that's why we are going to pick the wife up a new car in early 06.
Pricing was significantly lower then IIRC, and not as many of the cars that placed ahead of it had come out yet.
Iffy, was the 230 you tested rolling on Conti rubber? I was so happy to get those tires off of the car, I can't believe MB puts that shitty tire on at the factory. I run the GY Eagle F1 GS-D3 and it totally changed the handling and feel of the car. Higher speed sweeping turns that felt uncomfortable at 80 on the Contis are now handled at 100 and the car feels solid/stable throughout the turn. When cornering hard on the Contis it felt like the wall broke down and the tire rolled onto its sidewall. Very scary, but now it's smooth sailing.
QuoteIffy, was the 230 you tested rolling on Conti rubber? I was so happy to get those tires off of the car, I can't believe MB puts that shitty tire on at the factory. I run the GY Eagle F1 GS-D3 and it totally changed the handling and feel of the car. Higher speed sweeping turns that felt uncomfortable at 80 on the Contis are now handled at 100 and the car feels solid/stable throughout the turn. When cornering hard on the Contis it felt like the wall broke down and the tire rolled onto its sidewall. Very scary, but now it's smooth sailing.
If that's the standard tire, that's what was on the C230 I drove.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat was long, I read the intro went over the vehicle details then quickly mushing through the places then the evaluation.? My car came in 20th, oh well it works for us.? That's such a broad spectrum you have there the apples and oranges are over the place.? It seemed well written and looked pretty good to me.
9th place
Thanks. When did you buy?
Pre redesign in late 03, I do like the wheels on mine better than the new ones though. I really enjoy the little car and if you wind it out you can make it move nicely. If you keep the rpms down you can get 32-38 mpg but for spirited 4k and above it drops to about 15-19. We've had great luck with it so far and we drive the hell out of it. I think it's approaching 70k miles now, that's why we are going to pick the wife up a new car in early 06.
Pricing was significantly lower then IIRC, and not as many of the cars that placed ahead of it had come out yet.
I was trying to talk the wife into the G35 but she was set on the little Kompressor. A bit sporty looking and all MB look so good in black.
pfft, TL in first. <_<
You have the driving spirit of a 80 year old women.
QuoteQuoteIffy, was the 230 you tested rolling on Conti rubber? I was so happy to get those tires off of the car, I can't believe MB puts that shitty tire on at the factory. I run the GY Eagle F1 GS-D3 and it totally changed the handling and feel of the car. Higher speed sweeping turns that felt uncomfortable at 80 on the Contis are now handled at 100 and the car feels solid/stable throughout the turn. When cornering hard on the Contis it felt like the wall broke down and the tire rolled onto its sidewall. Very scary, but now it's smooth sailing.
If that's the standard tire, that's what was on the C230 I drove.
Well there are two standards one crappy one decent. You either get the Conti or the Pilot, I would have much rather had the Pilot. If you heard lots of road noise and even some tire whine at times you had Contis the Michelin offers a softer ride without the whine and poor characteristics. I think this is an area grossly overlooked when vehicles are tested, especially handling characteristics. Of course the suspension setup is critical to ride but also the rubber has a great effect on it as well. I don't think the guys making the big bucks pay enough attention to this detail.
QuoteQuoteQuoteIffy, was the 230 you tested rolling on Conti rubber? I was so happy to get those tires off of the car, I can't believe MB puts that shitty tire on at the factory. I run the GY Eagle F1 GS-D3 and it totally changed the handling and feel of the car. Higher speed sweeping turns that felt uncomfortable at 80 on the Contis are now handled at 100 and the car feels solid/stable throughout the turn. When cornering hard on the Contis it felt like the wall broke down and the tire rolled onto its sidewall. Very scary, but now it's smooth sailing.
If that's the standard tire, that's what was on the C230 I drove.
Well there are two standards one crappy one decent. You either get the Conti or the Pilot, I would have much rather had the Pilot. If you heard lots of road noise and even some tire whine at times you had Contis the Michelin offers a softer ride without the whine and poor characteristics. I think this is an area grossly overlooked when vehicles are tested, especially handling characteristics. Of course the suspension setup is critical to ride but also the rubber has a great effect on it as well. I don't think the guys making the big bucks pay enough attention to this detail.
Nope, no significant noise there.
How about you actually compare cars that compete? No one is going to compare the Lexus ES330, 300, and Avalon with cars like the 325i and G35.
QuoteHow about you actually compare cars that compete? No one is going to compare the Lexus ES330, 300, and Avalon with cars like the 325i and G35.
In fact, I do no someone who cross-shopped the ES330 with the G35 (and the TL) simply because it was Japanese, not because it was sporty.
Also, I addressed this twice in this topic already, as well as in the comparo itself. Read before you criticize next time.
You think I am going to spemd 30 minutes reading that thing? Not likely, I just flipped through the page.
Also:
"Also, I addressed this twice in this topic already, as well as in the comparo itself. Read before you criticize next time."
No, you haven't. How about you read before you criticize.
QuoteAlso:
"Also, I addressed this twice in this topic already, as well as in the comparo itself. Read before you criticize next time."
No, you haven't. How about you read before you criticize.
From the first post in this thread:
"I am not going to be fielding comments about the reasoning behind including almost everything that fell within the $29,000-$35,000 price range, it is explained on the comparison's main page."
and
"And, as noted, I don't think I need to discuss the reasoning behind choosing not to separate the cars into distinct groups, for the reasons already explained on the site."
That should be enough to direct you to the site, where it would be hard to miss:
"Obviously, not all twenty-six cars are direct competitors. Some are designed with drastically different audiences in mind, and it could be said that attempts should be made to separate these vehicles into different comparisons that better-reflect their individual purposes. But quite simply, readers wishing to see the review with certain vehicles omitted only need to skip past their pages, but those wishing to see a vehicle in the test that was excluded based on its intended audience would be out of luck. Also, all twenty-six vehicles are essentially competing for the buyers looking for an upscale sedan in the low $30,000s."
In both of those quotes you simply said you weren't going to talk about it, what happened to intelligent debate?
QuoteIn both of those quotes you simply said you weren't going to talk about it, what happened to intelligent debate?
Both of those quotes said where to find my explanation. And neither were sufficient to prevent three people already from either ignoring or not seeing the explanation, as I have already recieved three comments, at varying levels of politeness, that the cars ought to be placed in lots of little groups.
If I trusted people to bring it up in a form of intelligent debate (which they have not) I wouldn't have felt the need to insert those sentences.
If you're explanation wasn't bogus perhaps there wouldn't be comments.
And, I attempted to begin an intelligent debate, you however will not participate.
No, beginning an intelligent debate would be arguing against my reasons (which weren't put on the site so I could practice typing) for making that decision instead of just the decision.
QuoteIf you're explanation wasn't bogus perhaps there wouldn't be comments.
Oh, and that's real intelligent as well. :rolleyes:
Fine then, since you want me to do all of the work ;):
If you want people to be able to compare cross segment (though don't even pretend that people make car buying choices based on your comparos or really even consider them when making choices), use a rating system, but putting 26 cars on a comparo makes it completely unmanagable, especially since you have to click on each place to figure out what car it is. At least have an index or something that includes the cars' names. People are just as likely to cross shop a Avalon and 325i as they are to cross shop an Avalon and Suburban yet you didn't put the Avalon in the large suv comparo.
The comparison test is supposed to be read through. I originally included the cars' names in the URLs, but then people would just scroll through the link to find the order, maybe click on one car. It's supposed to flow through, and making people see all the choices can help give them information about a car they might not have considered.
And of course a 325i and Avalon don't compete directly, but a chain could be set up to link between them.
What happens if people don't want to waste a lot of time looking at cars they aren't considering? And, a chain could be connected to the Avalon and Suburban also, but that doesn't mean they should be in the same comparo.
QuoteWhat happens if people don't want to waste a lot of time looking at cars they aren't considering? And, a chain could be connected to the Avalon and Suburban also, but that doesn't mean they should be in the same comparo.
Then those people (you, it seems) will have to deal with it.
And a closer chain can be made between two equally-priced sedans than a sedan and a more-expensive SUV.
Oh really? Do it. This is what I figure for the Avalon:
Avalon>Five Hundred>Freestyle>Expedition>Suburban.
And, with the your low readership you can't afford to have an unfriendly format with unreasonable comparos.
QuoteOh really? Do it. This is what I figure for the Avalon:
Avalon>Five Hundred>Freestyle>Expedition>Suburban.
And, with the your low readership you can't afford to have an unfriendly format with unreasonable comparos.
Five Hundred doesn't compete with the Freestyle, Freestyle doesn't compete with the Expedition.
And I have Avalon>ES330>TL>325i.
And you disagreeing with the format doesn't make it unfriendly, and you disagreeing with the cars included doesn't make it unreasonable.
QuoteQuoteOh really? Do it. This is what I figure for the Avalon:
Avalon>Five Hundred>Freestyle>Expedition>Suburban.
And, with the your low readership you can't afford to have an unfriendly format with unreasonable comparos.
Five Hundred doesn't compete with the Freestyle, Freestyle doesn't compete with the Expedition.
And I have Avalon>ES330>TL>325i.
So you're telling me that people looking at the Five Hundred will not consider the Freestyle? And that people looking at the Freestyle will not consider the Expedition? You would be wrong.
Also, do you really think that some looking at an Avalon would seriously consider a ES330? It costs 5k more, is smaller, has fewer features, and less power.
QuoteQuoteQuoteOh really? Do it. This is what I figure for the Avalon:
Avalon>Five Hundred>Freestyle>Expedition>Suburban.
And, with the your low readership you can't afford to have an unfriendly format with unreasonable comparos.
Five Hundred doesn't compete with the Freestyle, Freestyle doesn't compete with the Expedition.
And I have Avalon>ES330>TL>325i.
So you're telling me that people looking at the Five Hundred will not consider the Freestyle? And that people looking at the Freestyle will not consider the Expedition? You would be wrong.
People CAN consider anything. Whether many do is another matter.
QuoteAlso, do you really think that some looking at an Avalon would seriously consider a ES330? It costs 5k more, is smaller, has fewer features, and less power.
Price difference of $5,000? What are you comparing, base vs. base? They are similar cars, one just has more room and power and one has more badge.
I am telling you that they will and have, to say that someone looking at a Five Hundred would look at a Freestyle or that someone looking at a Freestyle would look at an Expedition is just as reasonable as saying that someone looking at a Avalon would look at a ES330. Yes, it isn't likely, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
Either way, there really isn't any point to this. What do you expect me to say, "Geez, you're right, I'll throw this out and try again!"?
I had to make this decision before I started and weighed every factor that you're putting forward. And I made my decision, and you telling me that it was wrong is not going to convince me otherwise.
Also, I know that if I separated them into groups, you'd be the first to insist that this car should be and that car shouldn't be included. You can argue against a little group, but in a larger one you can just look at what you are interested in, and ignore the rest. Make up your own little groups, and you can tell their order by removing everything else from between them.
QuoteI am telling you that they will and have, to say that someone looking at a Five Hundred would look at a Freestyle or that someone looking at a Freestyle would look at an Expedition is just as reasonable as saying that someone looking at a Avalon would look at a ES330. Yes, it isn't likely, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
The Freestyle is the size and price of an Explorer, not an Expedition. They could very easily be cross-shopped, but Freestyle vs. Expedition makes as much sense as Explorer vs. Expedition or Escape vs. Explorer. Or Focus ZXW vs. Escape.
Oops, there isn't a 5k difference, I didn't realize that the Avalon was as overpriced as the ES330 but I just ran the numbers and discovered that that is the case.
QuoteQuoteI am telling you that they will and have, to say that someone looking at a Five Hundred would look at a Freestyle or that someone looking at a Freestyle would look at an Expedition is just as reasonable as saying that someone looking at a Avalon would look at a ES330. Yes, it isn't likely, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
The Freestyle is the size and price of an Explorer, not an Expedition. They could very easily be cross-shopped, but Freestyle vs. Expedition makes as much sense as Explorer vs. Expedition or Escape vs. Explorer. Or Focus ZXW vs. Escape.
I suspect many people have made those same comparisions.
QuoteEither way, there really isn't any point to this. What do you expect me to say, "Geez, you're right, I'll throw this out and try again!"?
I had to make this decision before I started and weighed every factor that you're putting forward. And I made my decision, and you telling me that it was wrong is not going to convince me otherwise.
Also, I know that if I separated them into groups, you'd be the first to insist that this car should be and that car shouldn't be included. You can argue against a little group, but in a larger one you can just look at what you are interested in, and ignore the rest. Make up your own little groups, and you can tell their order by removing everything else from between them.
I am telling you that you didn't make a good decision, using 26 cars make your website even more difficult to use than it was previously (your format sucks).
QuoteOops, there isn't a 5k difference, I didn't realize that the Avalon was as overpriced as the ES330 but I just ran the numbers and discovered that that is the case.
Overpriced compared to what? You can get an Avalon Touring with leather for $29K sticker, that's not overpriced for a large sedan.
You can option up an Avalon to $38K, but that's with features like adaptive cruise control found in very few cars south of $60,000. A nicely-equipped Avalon XLS would be $32K-$33K.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI am telling you that they will and have, to say that someone looking at a Five Hundred would look at a Freestyle or that someone looking at a Freestyle would look at an Expedition is just as reasonable as saying that someone looking at a Avalon would look at a ES330. Yes, it isn't likely, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
The Freestyle is the size and price of an Explorer, not an Expedition. They could very easily be cross-shopped, but Freestyle vs. Expedition makes as much sense as Explorer vs. Expedition or Escape vs. Explorer. Or Focus ZXW vs. Escape.
I suspect many people have made those same comparisions.
There's no accounting for taste.
Also, I would make my own order except your website is so difficult to use, the only way to figure it out would be to either open 26 different tabs and then close the ones I don't need or write everything down, I don't want to do that much work to read the reviews of an amatuer. You have to cater to the reader with your design, format, and comparos, not the other way around.
QuoteQuoteOops, there isn't a 5k difference, I didn't realize that the Avalon was as overpriced as the ES330 but I just ran the numbers and discovered that that is the case.
Overpriced compared to what? You can get an Avalon Touring with leather for $29K sticker, that's not overpriced for a large sedan.
You can option up an Avalon to $38K, but that's with features like adaptive cruise control found in very few cars south of $60,000. A nicely-equipped Avalon XLS would be $32K-$33K.
That would be at least 4k more than a comparable Five Hundred and at least 2k more than a 300.
QuoteQuoteEither way, there really isn't any point to this. What do you expect me to say, "Geez, you're right, I'll throw this out and try again!"?
I had to make this decision before I started and weighed every factor that you're putting forward. And I made my decision, and you telling me that it was wrong is not going to convince me otherwise.
Also, I know that if I separated them into groups, you'd be the first to insist that this car should be and that car shouldn't be included. You can argue against a little group, but in a larger one you can just look at what you are interested in, and ignore the rest. Make up your own little groups, and you can tell their order by removing everything else from between them.
I am telling you that you didn't make a good decision, using 26 cars make your website even more difficult to use than it was previously (your format sucks).
And you're expecting, what, an apology?
You are not offering constructive criticism by informing me what you feel sucks and what does not. Neither are you offering constructive criticism by saying that starting over is the only solution.
You'd be openly negative no matter what I put out unless you agreed with every last judgement in it, so why should I continue to listen to you?
In your world, there are two viewpoints: yours, and stupid viewpoints. And that doesn't help either of us.
QuoteQuoteQuoteOops, there isn't a 5k difference, I didn't realize that the Avalon was as overpriced as the ES330 but I just ran the numbers and discovered that that is the case.
Overpriced compared to what? You can get an Avalon Touring with leather for $29K sticker, that's not overpriced for a large sedan.
You can option up an Avalon to $38K, but that's with features like adaptive cruise control found in very few cars south of $60,000. A nicely-equipped Avalon XLS would be $32K-$33K.
That would be at least 4k more than a comparable Five Hundred and at least 2k more than a 300.
The Five Hundred is the value among full-size sedans, it's not the norm.
I'll do a price comparison, but first I need to know if you're going to want sticker or real-world pricing.
I suggested an index and you blew that off, when I have offered constructive criticism in the past you have completely ignored it, thinking you know better. You might know more about cars (though I don't think it is likely), but I certainly know a lot more about the way a good website looks and works than you do.
Sticker, you like to complain when I don't use consumer set prices but that is hardly reasonable, you can't fault a car because consumers are willing to pay extra.
QuoteI suggested an index and you blew that off, when I have offered constructive criticism in the past you have completely ignored it, thinking you know better. You might know more about cars (though I don't think it is likely), but I certainly know a lot more about the way a good website looks and works than you do.
You are the webdesign expert between us, but I already stated the reasons that I don't plan on introducing an index.
And what other criticism/advice are you referring to? I wouldn't "blow it off" just to be rude, I'd choose based on what I thought was most useful/convenient.
I am refering to what I told you when you first designed your website, you have to remember that it doesn't matter if you like the way it looks, it only matters what your audience thinks.
Your reason was because it would interrupt the "flow", that doesn't even make sense. Having an easy to use interface will keep your readers there, that is a good thing, even if it doesn't "flow" properly. I have no desire to look at a website if requires me to go through 27 pages when I am just looking for the review of one car.
I really enjoy cross pollination.
QuoteQuoteQuoteOops, there isn't a 5k difference, I didn't realize that the Avalon was as overpriced as the ES330 but I just ran the numbers and discovered that that is the case.
Overpriced compared to what? You can get an Avalon Touring with leather for $29K sticker, that's not overpriced for a large sedan.
You can option up an Avalon to $38K, but that's with features like adaptive cruise control found in very few cars south of $60,000. A nicely-equipped Avalon XLS would be $32K-$33K.
That would be at least 4k more than a comparable Five Hundred and at least 2k more than a 300.
All the cars are equipped with heated leather power seats, a 6-disc CD changer, a sunroof, traction control, and side airbags. MSRPs.
LaCrosse CXS: $31,355
300 Touring: $31,465
Five Hundred Limited: $28,455
Maxima SL: $32,330
Avalon XLS: $31,580
So I suppose all large sedans are overpriced. After all, they cost more than the Five Hundred.
QuoteI really enjoy cross pollination.
:lol:
Random.
What happened to 33-34k for a well equipped on? I was going primarly off of that number.
QuoteI am refering to what I told you when you first designed your website, you have to remember that it doesn't matter if you like the way it looks, it only matters what your audience thinks.
Your reason was because it would interrupt the "flow", that doesn't even make sense. Having an easy to use interface will keep your readers there, that is a good thing, even if it doesn't "flow" properly. I have no desire to look at a website if requires me to go through 27 pages when I am just looking for the review of one car.
It's a comparison test, the cars are being compared. It's not a row of individual reviews.
And I am currently my primary audience, so what I think does indeed matter most. And I don't think the color scheme looks like a default setting, and don't see how or why anyone else would either.
QuoteWhat happened to 33-34k for a well equipped on? I was going primarly off of that number.
I was including a navigation system as "well-equipped", but you can't get one in the Five Hundred or LaCrosse for comparison.
QuoteQuoteI am refering to what I told you when you first designed your website, you have to remember that it doesn't matter if you like the way it looks, it only matters what your audience thinks.
Your reason was because it would interrupt the "flow", that doesn't even make sense. Having an easy to use interface will keep your readers there, that is a good thing, even if it doesn't "flow" properly. I have no desire to look at a website if requires me to go through 27 pages when I am just looking for the review of one car.
It's a comparison test, the cars are being compared. It's not a row of individual reviews.
Not if your reader doesn't want to read it all at once and is just looking for a bit of information on one car.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI am refering to what I told you when you first designed your website, you have to remember that it doesn't matter if you like the way it looks, it only matters what your audience thinks.
Your reason was because it would interrupt the "flow", that doesn't even make sense. Having an easy to use interface will keep your readers there, that is a good thing, even if it doesn't "flow" properly. I have no desire to look at a website if requires me to go through 27 pages when I am just looking for the review of one car.
It's a comparison test, the cars are being compared. It's not a row of individual reviews.
Not if your reader doesn't want to read it all at once and is just looking for a bit of information on one car.
Individual reviews are being phased in gradually as well. I haven't gotten to upscale or large sedans yet.
Still, having a quick and easy way to get to certain cars will make it much easier for users to compare only the cars they want to and comparos often have unique perspectives, even if you just look at the section for a single car.
QuoteQuoteI really enjoy cross pollination.
:lol:
Random.
When hopping into a feud one must be. :praise:
QuoteQuoteQuoteI really enjoy cross pollination.
:lol:
Random.
When hopping into a feud one must be. :praise:
This is a brutal feud :lol:
QuoteStill, having a quick and easy way to get to certain cars will make it much easier for users to compare only the cars they want to and comparos often have unique perspectives, even if you just look at the section for a single car.
Currently, my only audience is myself and people on CarSPIN and C/D. And it's set up the way it is to prevent people from checking the ranking order from a single page, as I feel the explanation is far more important.
It doesn't matter what you feel, it matters what your readers feel. You aren't trying to please yourself (or at least you shouldn't be), you should be trying to please your user. I didn't read the reviews, yet I still know the rankings, it just required more work. And, you don't have to list the actual order on the index page if you don't want to, just have the cars in alaphetical order (like you already have on the first page and have links on them to the section for each car.
QuoteIt doesn't matter what you feel, it matters what your readers feel. You aren't trying to please yourself (or at least you shouldn't be), you should be trying to please your user. I didn't read the reviews, yet I still know the rankings, it just required more work. And, you don't have to list the actual order on the index page if you don't want to, just have the cars in alaphetical order (like you already have on the first page and have links on them to the section for each car.
But then you just scroll over the car and see the ranking. Believe me, I considered this.
And if people still aren't going to bother to read the reviews even if they have to be on the same page as the review to get the order, I can at least feel vindicated that I made them work more, even if they didn't read what I wrote.
So you think making your users work hardier is a good thing? Wow...
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI really enjoy cross pollination.
:lol:
Random.
When hopping into a feud one must be. :praise:
This is a brutal feud :lol:
TBR: "Your site blows donkey sac"
Iffy: "No it doesn't, I like it alot"
TBR: "Make it user friendly or crash it please"
Iffy: "Everybody likes my site but you"
TBR: "I'm the website master"
Iffy: "Yes you are, but my site it good"
TBR: "Your site sucks, I'm not reading your comparo"
Iffy: "Well fine then"
TBR: "Did I mention your format sucks too"
Iffy: "I really like my format"
TBR: "Well whooptie dooo, it sucks"
Iffy: "Not it doesn't it fits me well"
TBR: "It has to fit the reader not you"
Iffy: "Well that's not the way I see it"
TBR: "Clicking 28 pages to read your article sucks"
Iffy: "Well fine then"
The point of writing something is for people to read it. It takes many hours to write up the thing, but only about 40 minutes (after test driving) to determine a final order.
I will do whatever it takes to encourage people to actually READ the thing, instead of just looking at the order. If they're going to waste my time, I'll waste theirs.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI really enjoy cross pollination.
:lol:
Random.
When hopping into a feud one must be. :praise:
This is a brutal feud :lol:
TBR: "Your site blows donkey sac"
Iffy: "No it doesn't, I like it alot"
TBR: "Make it user friendly or crash it please"
Iffy: "Everybody likes my site but you"
TBR: "I'm the website master"
Iffy: "Yes you are, but my site it good"
TBR: "Your site sucks, I'm not reading your comparo"
Iffy: "Well fine then"
TBR: "Did I mention your format sucks too"
Iffy: "I really like my format"
TBR: "Well whooptie dooo, it sucks"
Iffy: "Not it doesn't it fits me well"
TBR: "It has to fit the reader not you"
Iffy: "Well that's not the way I see it"
TBR: "Clicking 28 pages to read your article sucks"
Iffy: "Well fine then"
:lol: :lol: LOL
Guess what, I don't care how much time you spent writing it, it doesn't matter if your reader doesn't want to read it all.
QuoteGuess what, I don't care how much time you spent writing it, it doesn't matter if your reader doesn't want to read it all.
Then they're at least going to go through every page.
I'm not running my site as a business, it's a hobby. I don't have to please everyone, and I certainly don't make it exist to make not reading it easier for you.
TBR: You made your point. Go join a debate team or something.
May the festivites end, and the :wub: begin.
Ifcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.
I feel like I'm getting caught between sides in trench warfare, but, nevertheless.
Ifcar,
A couple of thoughts.
You might want to be clearer upfront regarding the criteria you are judging the cars against. By that I mean provide more detail on what generates a merit vs. demerit. Many of the vehicles are being knocked for a stiffer ride, but the improved handling that often (but not always) accompanies that is a merit in many people's eyes. You clearly approached it from the "comfort" side, many in this category are looking at it from the "sport" side.
Also, and I'm not jumping on TBR's bandwagon, but if you are going to cast the net so wide, why not be more reflective of the ways consumers shop today? I know that car mags insist on doing car-to-car and wagon-to-wagon and suv-to-suv comparos, but most consumer aren't restrained by those categories anymore. I don't know anyone who bought an auto in the last two years who didn't shop across all those categories. It would be a challenge, but it could be a nice differentiator for you if you could generate something more reflective of the way actual consumers shop these days. Considering the options, a family's challenge is much more complex than it used to be.
QuoteI feel like I'm getting caught between sides in trench warfare, but, nevertheless.
Ifcar,
A couple of thoughts.
You might want to be clearer upfront regarding the criteria you are judging the cars against. By that I mean provide more detail on what generates a merit vs. demerit. Many of the vehicles are being knocked for a stiffer ride, but the improved handling that often (but not always) accompanies that is a merit in many people's eyes. You clearly approached it from the "comfort" side, many in this category are looking at it from the "sport" side.
A stiff ride that allows for excellent handling is treated the same as a comfortable ride that leads to sloppy handling. A balance of ride comfort and agility is the ideal form.
Also, and I'm not jumping on TBR's bandwagon, but if you are going to cast the net so wide, why not be more reflective of the ways consumers shop today? I know that car mags insist on doing car-to-car and wagon-to-wagon and suv-to-suv comparos, but most consumer aren't restrained by those categories anymore. I don't know anyone who bought an auto in the last two years who didn't shop across all those categories. It would be a challenge, but it could be a nice differentiator for you if you could generate something more reflective of the way actual consumers shop these days. Considering the options, a family's challenge is much more complex than it used to be.
It's already too many cars to cast the net wider still. Also, I'd be to inclined to rank any wagons too much higher or any coupes to far lower than a comparable sedan, because the advantages/disadvantages there are a question of practicality versus styling, only one of which is a factor in the comparison.
...
QuoteIfcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.
A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.
You want people to benefit from your reviews, right? Well, it would make it a whole lot easier for that to happen if you had an easier to use format, I would even be willing to design a whole site for you if you are willing to work with me, pm me if you're interest.
TBR slams Iffy then asks for a job, it's a classic approach. :lol:
I have no intention of charging ifcar, though if he is too difficult to deal with I might change my mind ;) :lol:
No charge is a tempting offer, I will have to consider it. My only concerns would be how easily I could continue to use MS FrontPage on the site, and the amount of time I've already spent on the stupid thing.
There's also the concern of having my way without being insulting and/or being slapped with a $600 webdesign fee. :D
The deal is sealed, break the guy out a base web application and let him write his reviews.
QuoteI have no intention of charging ifcar, though if he is too difficult to deal with I might change my mind ;) :lol:
I can just see....in a year, Iffy gets slapped with a bill for thousands of bucks :lol:
Thats very nice of TBR though. I would jump at the offer. Would you be able to keep the domain ifcar.net if you switched?
Ifcar I enjoyed the review. I think you made a good point on the last page that i didn't notice before responding to you on C&D. :P
"Before moving on to Acura's excellent entry-lux sedan, it is necessary to point out that it in this highly-competitive class, there is no single winner. The first-place car represents the most complete package, delivering a blend of all the good traits expected in this class (essentially a mix of luxury/comfort and driving fun), but not all consumers are necessarily looking for that. Thus, it could be said that the ten vehicles that elbowed their ways past sixteen of their competitors all achieved the equivalent of the first-place slot, though they either focused on or fell short in one specific area. Each one has definite advantages and disadvantages over all the others, and a case could be made that any one of them deserves to occupy this space."
Well its a long point but a good one nonetheless. Almost exactly what i was trying to say on C&D before I read everything. :lol:
His webhost and domain would stay the same. Ifcar, if you took me up on my offer I would rather you not use frontpage simply because it has a tendency of screwing up designs not originally written with it, I find nvu to be a better alternative.
QuoteQuoteI have no intention of charging ifcar, though if he is too difficult to deal with I might change my mind ;) :lol:
I can just see....in a year, Iffy gets slapped with a bill for thousands of bucks :lol:
Thats very nice of TBR though. I would jump at the offer. Would you be able to keep the domain ifcar.net if you switched?
I would hope so, I doubt I'd even be changing servers. I'll be talking to TBR about this, I suppose. I'd be jumping higher at the offer if I hadn't already spent so much time with the site design, but free professional work can't really be argued with.
QuoteHis webhost and domain would stay the same. Ifcar, if you took me up on my offer I would rather you not use frontpage simply because it has a tendency of screwing up designs not originally written with it, I find nvu to be a better alternative.
Is it free?
QuoteIfcar I enjoyed the review. I think you made a good point on the last page that i didn't notice before responding to you on C&D. :P
"Before moving on to Acura's excellent entry-lux sedan, it is necessary to point out that it in this highly-competitive class, there is no single winner. The first-place car represents the most complete package, delivering a blend of all the good traits expected in this class (essentially a mix of luxury/comfort and driving fun), but not all consumers are necessarily looking for that. Thus, it could be said that the ten vehicles that elbowed their ways past sixteen of their competitors all achieved the equivalent of the first-place slot, though they either focused on or fell short in one specific area. Each one has definite advantages and disadvantages over all the others, and a case could be made that any one of them deserves to occupy this space."
Well its a long point but a good one nonetheless. Almost exactly what i was trying to say on C&D before I read everything. :lol:
Thanks. I was going to stick that in a Conclusion page, but figured it was long enough already, so I just put it in with the Acura.
QuoteQuoteHis webhost and domain would stay the same. Ifcar, if you took me up on my offer I would rather you not use frontpage simply because it has a tendency of screwing up designs not originally written with it, I find nvu to be a better alternative.
Is it free?
Yep, it is actually managed by the mozilla foundation, just like firefox and thunderbird.
QuoteQuoteQuoteHis webhost and domain would stay the same. Ifcar, if you took me up on my offer I would rather you not use frontpage simply because it has a tendency of screwing up designs not originally written with it, I find nvu to be a better alternative.
Is it free?
Yep, it is actually managed by the mozilla foundation, just like firefox and thunderbird.
That's a good sign, anyway. Do you have a link for a download?
http://cvs.nvu.com/download/nvu-1.0-win32-installer-full.exe (http://cvs.nvu.com/download/nvu-1.0-win32-installer-full.exe)
Thanks.
QuoteQuoteIfcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.
A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.
Yeah, i know, but maybe test more powerful models, and then test some less powerful models in a separate test, so you won't have to include an S60 2.4 and an S60 t5, etc, all in the same review. You should base your test off of maybe price or engine output or luxury or something so you'll have fewer test cars and a shorter review instead of just having a huge test with all of the entry-lux sedans available.
Just a suggestion.
Good job, iffy. That must've taken a lot of work, but at least this was a fun group to test drive. Even though there are a lot of good cars there, I'm suprised the A4 ended up in 10th.
QuoteQuoteQuoteIfcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.
A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.
Yeah, i know, but maybe test more powerful models, and then test some less powerful models in a separate test, so you won't have to include an S60 2.4 and an S60 t5, etc, all in the same review. You should base your test off of maybe price or engine output or luxury or something so you'll have fewer test cars and a shorter review instead of just having a huge test with all of the entry-lux sedans available.
Just a suggestion.
Too many variables, too much of a chance that true competitors could be separated by rigid criteria.
QuoteGood job, iffy. That must've taken a lot of work, but at least this was a fun group to test drive. Even though there are a lot of good cars there, I'm suprised the A4 ended up in 10th.
Thanks, and if it weren't fun I wouldn't be doing it. B)
And the A4 simply didn't stand out enough to make it up higher, though 10th place is still very good considering what it did have to beat to get there.
I just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er :praise:
Why do you feel the 3er was down on power? While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all. The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.
QuoteI just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er :praise:
Why do you feel the 3er was down on power? While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all. The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.
Are you talking about the old 325i or the new one?
QuoteQuoteI just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er :praise:
Why do you feel the 3er was down on power? While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all. The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.
Are you talking about the old 325i or the new one?
The old one.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIfcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.
A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.
Yeah, i know, but maybe test more powerful models, and then test some less powerful models in a separate test, so you won't have to include an S60 2.4 and an S60 t5, etc, all in the same review. You should base your test off of maybe price or engine output or luxury or something so you'll have fewer test cars and a shorter review instead of just having a huge test with all of the entry-lux sedans available.
Just a suggestion.
Too many variables, too much of a chance that true competitors could be separated by rigid criteria.
if you have a standard, liek 250hp and up or something, you can get the A4 3.2, the 330i, G35, Avalon, etc. you may miss one or two, but it's better than a whole jumble of cars mashed together.
Keeping competitors together is more important to me than risking including extra vehicles.
Isn't cross pollination great?
QuoteIsn't cross pollination great?
No ones arguing now :lol:
I might have missed this, I was skimming a bit, but which car did you over-all find the most fun to drive?
QuoteI might have missed this, I was skimming a bit, but which car did you over-all find the most fun to drive?
He said the 3er provided the best sports car attributes and had best in class handling and all.
QuoteQuoteI might have missed this, I was skimming a bit, but which car did you over-all find the most fun to drive?
He said the 3er provided the best sports car attributes and had best in class handling and all.
If you consider handling the mark of a true fun-to-drive car, the 3er. If you prefer power, the 300C. If you like a mix, the G35 and 3er are very close.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er :praise:
Why do you feel the 3er was down on power? While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all. The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.
Are you talking about the old 325i or the new one?
The old one.
Must have missed this.
It never felt underpowered, but when you consider how fast many of its competitors are, it just falls short. Yes, it felt like it had more power than its hp figures implied, but that's still beating only 184 in a class were 250+ isn't rare.
The only 0-60 time I've seen for an auto 05 325i was 8.1 seconds. It feels faster than that, but that's still not enough for that class.
I'd never suggest expanding this review, my suggestion was about future reviews. The size and complexity of this piece is impressive in its own right, but if you're looking for a way to stand above the crowd try something no one else is doing. I fully admit it's a difficult proposition, but the value would e tremendous.
Without providing detail on where you drove them, for me it is hard to judge whether or not you really had the opportunity to push the cars to discover how well they balanced handling/comfort.
I take most of the cars on an approximately 10-mile loop around Waldorf, Maryland. I don't destroy the cars while testing them Car and Driver style, as they are driven on test drives, occasionally with a salesman in tow.
I also get a chance to evaluate a good number of vehicles at the annual GM-sponsered Auto Show In Motion, where they have their cars and some competing products on a short track course, where I can even better-evaluate the cars' handling capabilities.
And while it would be interesting to evaluate sedans versus wagons and the like, it would be impossible to set standards that could keep it from being too inclusive. I have considered smaller comparisons of vehicles from radically different classes (a company's minivan against its own comparably-priced SUV, for example), but those would probably end up more as editorials about which general vehicle type is almost always better rather than useful reviews.
Ifcar: don't dealerships catch on after a while that you don't plan to buy? And on an unrelated note, how has your parents' xB been so far?
QuoteIfcar: don't dealerships catch on after a while that you don't plan to buy? And on an unrelated note, how has your parents' xB been so far?
I often go with someone else, often someone who is considering a new car and drives something better than I do. It helps get test drives and gives a second opinion.
And my parents seem very happy with their xB. They mentioned getting a second one as a strong possibility as a replacement for the 96 Caravan.
I think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type. I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof. And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero). The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even. Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.
QuoteI think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type. I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof. And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero). The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even. Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.
That's strange, did you try adjusting seat height? My uncle owns one and fits in it fine, and he's 6'1" and 220ish
And the TL in first again? You really like all rounders, don't you? And the Avalon?
Oh my, if. Have I taught you nothing?
It's pretty well written, though. I'd like to see some more figures in them. Power, speed, things like that, that you can lift from reviews of the manufacturer websites. They are essential to what a car is. Considering that the TL place much higher than the TSX, I'm sure that the power was a factor.
As tested transmission would also be nice. Or were they all automatics?
QuoteI think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type. I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof. And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero). The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even. Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.
The 9-5 is surprisingly expensive, and the X-Type's price has been slashed every year. Couldn't tell you about lease prices though.
QuoteAnd the TL in first again? You really like all rounders, don't you? And the Avalon?
Oh my, if. Have I taught you nothing?
It's pretty well written, though. I'd like to see some more figures in them. Power, speed, things like that, that you can lift from reviews of the manufacturer websites. They are essential to what a car is. Considering that the TL place much higher than the TSX, I'm sure that the power was a factor.
As tested transmission would also be nice. Or were they all automatics?
All-arounders are comparison test winners.
As to the specs you wanted included, power (I assume you mean horsepower) can easily be, but I assumed the forumites here and at C/D already knew them (or had a rough idea), and I don't know if by speed you mean acceleration (which not many automakers include on their sites, and with varying degrees of accuracy) or top speed, which I don't consider especially important.
And yes, the specific cars reviewed were automatics to keep it fair to auto-onlys like the 300C.
QuoteQuoteI think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type. I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof. And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero). The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even. Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.
The 9-5 is surprisingly expensive, and the X-Type's price has been slashed every year. Couldn't tell you about lease prices though.
The leases on Jaguars are tremendously expensive, thanks to poor residuals. Also, the Jag's one of the coldest, numbest cars I've driven. The Saab 9-5 (which, honestly, I was just a passenger of) seemed far more responsive (and the 9-3 was as well, and that placed higher, as I recall, so good show on that) and the Jag can still touch 40 grand easy and be left in the dust by a 9-5. Plus, all that extra room, and the Swedishness of the car put it far higher in my book--but I understand if some people don't appreciate the Swedishness.
And all rounders shouldn't win comparison tests, not at this level. You're rewarding the car for being excellently mediocre, or rather, excelling at mediocrity. The TL is a great car, yes. Is it a better value than the 3 series? Maybe. The G35? No. Is it more luxurious than the G35? Yes. The 3er, C class, and A4? No. Is it more fun to drive than the Avalon? Yes. Is it more fun to drive than a 3er or G35? I don't think so. Would I buy it over a 330i, C350, A4 2.0T? No*. Is it a good car? Yes. Is it the best? No.
And why be fair if the market is not? If one car is faster than another, should you give it extra weight because it was a power advantage or slash the tires if it has a handling advantage? If it's available as a manual, it would have been nice to see them tested.
*Provided all automobiles are manual transmission.
A comparison tries to keep as many factors equal as possible, and it's very easy to do so with the transmission option. Also, aside from enthusiasts, most people buy automatics anyway.
And all-arounders win comparison tests because they do everything that virtually every buyer could want, covering all the bases. Otherwise, you have to pick a trait that you think is the most important, and make the car that does that best the winner.
QuoteA comparison tries to keep as many factors equal as possible, and it's very easy to do so with the transmission option. Also, aside from enthusiasts, most people buy automatics anyway.
And all-arounders win comparison tests because they do everything that virtually every buyer could want, covering all the bases. Otherwise, you have to pick a trait that you think is the most important, and make the car that does that best the winner.
Right. There are factors that are more important. In a sports car, handling is more important than comfort. In an mpv, handling isn't so important. On a midsize luxury car, handling, acceleration, and comfort should all be important. Unlike Consumer Reports, the way the car drives should be more important than how big the trunk is.
They all are important, so the best balance of the three factors is the car that wins the comparison. If a car falls short in one of those ways, it isn't going to win even if it's the best at another.
You should have tossed in a Lotus Elise just for the fun of it. Boo Ya!
QuoteThey all are important, so the best balance of the three factors is the car that wins the comparison. If a car falls short in one of those ways, it isn't going to win even if it's the best at another.
What is the best balance varies by segment, you can't look at lux cars the same way you would look at mainstream cars, they have different buyers with different desires.
QuoteQuoteThey all are important, so the best balance of the three factors is the car that wins the comparison. If a car falls short in one of those ways, it isn't going to win even if it's the best at another.
What is the best balance varies by segment, you can't look at lux cars the same way you would look at mainstream cars, they have different buyers with different desires.
Very true. Interior quality, for example, was more important here than in mainstream sedans, and interior space (while far from negligible) was less so, to name two examples.