I never had much respect for Jalopnik. A bunch of opinionated amateurs with a sufficiently large reader-base to justify sending cars to them for testing and reviewing purposes.
I'm happy the Camaro won...but this article was crap. The process was flawed, and the reviewers were giving night+day comments on the same car in a few of the categories...are they kidding?!
I can accept a few characteristics that the less...."flexible" folks out there may dislike. But explain to me two things (don't really...just think about it)....
#1: Why did they keep harping and badgering on about the Camaro's size, and "how its fenders flared out from around a Honda -- give me a f'n break) when the Mustang...is no more than an inch smaller in any direction!?!?
#2: Why they kept belaboring the Camaro about how heavy and fat and *insert bs statement here (*-more on this below)* it was....when they only mentioned it in passing that the Challenger weighs a almost 300 pounds MORE than that!?!?!
They were pigeon-holing the car into a classification that it doesn't fit into: the simple "Muscle Car". This reflected in many comments: "for a muscle car", "among muscle cars", etc...
I came away from that read, convinced they went into this with every intention of tearing the Camaro down...for whatever reason, these people have had very
little good to say about the car since it's conception at NAIAS 2006. It's blatantly obvious, and unprofessional (which is half the reason they're still the amateurs of the car-site/mag community).
Again, I'm glad the Camaro won 1st place; a position it I think deserves unquestionably, But this 'commentary' was a waste of bandwidth, imo.
*short word on weight: name another midsized car that, for 30k (or more for that matter), has a 400+ hp V8, RWD, 4 seats, an IRS, and doesn't
weigh somewhere in the neighborhood of 3700-3900 lbs. Name a legitimate example, and you can call the Camaro "fat"......