Motor Trends Best Driver's Car Competition 2009

[Camaro_Corvette]

Originally Posted by rodimus prime

LOL look at this stupid graph.

So according to this particular graph, they only found above average statistics on only three of these ten utterly amazing cars!

Wait, I take that back, the Caddilac CTS-V got one above average rating.


Their full of crap, I would proudly drive any of those eight cars...( I don't like what GT500s look like, and the miata aint doing it for me.) Thanks for wasting my life motor trend...

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by KIMBERSSGIRL1

LOL A Mazda Miata? Those cars are even to small for dwarfs! More fun?
My sister had one and it was the worst POS besides a Toyota MR2 I have ever rode in!
I can't believe people like those tiny tinny toilet toys.

I own 1 and I'm 6' 3" 220 lbs, but thanks for your open minded appraisal.

p.s. see my previous post in this thread.

[KoTToN]

One look at the mazda score compared to the beemer above it and the zr-1 below, forced me to print out the entire article to replace the 2 ply quilted roll in my bathroom. Im just sayin....

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Mosher

Miata is fine. All the cars in this review are fine. The problem I have is they try to Quantify what is really just there opinion, with numbers gained at the track. Simple fix would be to have 2 ratings, 1.) is what place the car was at the track, and then 2.) what car they "LIKED" the most. Trying to use some funky graph and say that the ZR1 is not as good as the 5 cars above it when it Molly wopped everything there, just because they don't like it, is the crux of the problem.

It's a bit like telling Lance Armstrong that, well, he will be 6th not 1st in the tour de france because he looks funny riding the bike and all he did was go fast in the straights.

In the end, it just goes to show that, the most important thing you can do when contemplating buying a new car is take it for a spin. YOUR judgement on what is good and bad is the most important. They are not going to be paying that bill every month.

like what you said so much, i had to post it again!

[Operator]

Oh, and as to the ZR1.. if you watch the video from the track driver... he says it's awesome but very raw, and that in the hands of a non-expert it would be difficult to drive as quickly as say... the R8. That's probably why it scored the way it did. Remember, this was a "Best Drivers Car" comparison, not "Best Car" or "Fastest Car" or "Best Car for the Money" so it's all relative to what you (they) are reviewing in these cars...

[Stew]

Originally Posted by MikesZ

No, he's referring to the original ponycar comparo between the Camaro SS, Mustang GT with track pack, and the Challenger RT. MT gave it to the Camaro by a wide margin.

Actually they said they are all close, the ONLY place they stated the Challenger lacked was in handling, and a lot of that has to do with the tires. THe one that the Mustang won was Car and Driver, and if it wasn't for their BS fun-to-drive and gotta-have it factors, the Camaro would have come in third in their comparo. THe issue with the Camaros handling is that it apparently makes the numbers, but it heavy and understeers. THat's kinda what I got out of it, it'll make the trip, it's just not that fun and kinda scary getting there, and if you are not a pro, you're probably going to end up in trouble.

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by Kurt_OH

The people bashing it are the same people to scream as soon as any statement complimenting another car is made, or any statement discussing an imperfection of the Camaro is made.

These AREN'T "automotive/driving fans".

I did not know you had to like every car on the road to be a "automotive/driving fan".....

[garagelogic]

Did some of you actually read the article, or did you just scan the participating cars and where they were ranked? If you took the time to read the article, the author said up front that this particular comparison was not a traditional “best overall performance” or “best handling” documentation. They said, and I quote:

… this year we're going to [consider] such nuances as a car's ability to induce driver confidence and its prowess at enveloping our judges in ergonomic delight. We even deemed it important to examine not only steering feel but also steering-wheel feel: That's right, how well does the shape of the helm satisfy the fingers? These and other criteria are all scrutinized in the following pages.

I don’t think there is anyone out there who will argue that the Corvette ZR1 would win any performance test, hands down over the rest of the cars in the field, nor would anyone ever think that a GT500 would even compare favorably, let alone place ahead of that car on any track. But then again, this was not a “best performance car” article; it was a best driver’s car article.

Using the quote above, the ZR1 scored a 6th place finish in this compare because apparently, despite its awesomeness, it failed to inspire driver confidence or ergonomic delight. While we all recognize the performance that comes with a ZR1, I doubt there are very many of us that would feel comfortable getting behind the wheel of that car for the first time and trying to reach its potential. IMO, I think that’s what they were trying to say when they referenced driver confidence.

Then there is the issue of ergonomic comfort, which is probably 90% subjective, at least. I can see where they are coming from here, as well. While many here don’t mind or even like the design and layout of the Gen5 interior, I would hazard to guess that a majority of people who are not Camaro enthusiasts would have issues with it. Let’s face it, when the GT500’s first hit the showrooms, the interior design and materials were its biggest shortcoming, yet die-hard Mustang/Shelby guys reacted much like Gen5 owners do now and said things like “it’s not that bad” or “I didn’t but the car for its interior”, etc. However, the average person who did not have a special affection for the car tended to point out the interior as a shortcoming.

If you will just view the article for what it is, you will see that getting all bent out of shape for where a particular car is placed should not be an issue. If you feel anything less than a straight up performance comparison is stupid, then this particular article will only serve to make you angry.

Life’s too short to get riled up over any vehicle, let alone a magazine article that might have placed whatever beloved nameplate you prefer in a less-than-flattering light.

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

Did some of you actually read the article, or did you just scan the participating cars and where they were ranked? If you took the time to read the article, the author said up front that this particular comparison was not a traditional “best overall performance” or “best handling” documentation. They said, and I quote:



I don’t think there is anyone out there who will argue that the Corvette ZR1 would win any performance test, hands down over the rest of the cars in the field, nor would anyone ever think that a GT500 would even compare favorably, let alone place ahead of that car on any track. But then again, this was not a “best performance car” article; it was a best driver’s car article.

Using the quote above, the ZR1 scored a 6th place finish in this compare because apparently, despite its awesomeness, it failed to inspire driver confidence or ergonomic delight. While we all recognize the performance that comes with a ZR1, I doubt there are very many of us that would feel comfortable getting behind the wheel of that car for the first time and trying to reach its potential. IMO, I think that’s what they were trying to say when they referenced driver confidence.

Then there is the issue of ergonomic comfort, which is probably 90% subjective, at least. I can see where they are coming from here, as well. While many here don’t mind or even like the design and layout of the Gen5 interior, I would hazard to guess that a majority of people who are not Camaro enthusiasts would have issues with it. Let’s face it, when the GT500’s first hit the showrooms, the interior design and materials were its biggest shortcoming, yet die-hard Mustang/Shelby guys reacted much like Gen5 owners do now and said things like “it’s not that bad” or “I didn’t but the car for its interior”, etc. However, the average person who did not have a special affection for the car tended to point out the interior as a shortcoming.

If you will just view the article for what it is, you will see that getting all bent out of shape for where a particular car is placed should not be an issue. If you feel anything less than a straight up performance comparison is stupid, then this particular article will only serve to make you angry.

Life’s too short to get riled up over any vehicle, let alone a magazine article that might have placed whatever beloved nameplate you prefer in a less-than-flattering light.

I agree with you... odd...

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

Did some of you actually read the article, or did you just scan the participating cars and where they were ranked? If you took the time to read the article, the author said up front that this particular comparison was not a traditional “best overall performance” or “best handling” documentation. They said, and I quote:



I don’t think there is anyone out there who will argue that the Corvette ZR1 would win any performance test, hands down over the rest of the cars in the field, nor would anyone ever think that a GT500 would even compare favorably, let alone place ahead of that car on any track. But then again, this was not a “best performance car” article; it was a best driver’s car article.

Using the quote above, the ZR1 scored a 6th place finish in this compare because apparently, despite its awesomeness, it failed to inspire driver confidence or ergonomic delight. While we all recognize the performance that comes with a ZR1, I doubt there are very many of us that would feel comfortable getting behind the wheel of that car for the first time and trying to reach its potential. IMO, I think that’s what they were trying to say when they referenced driver confidence.

Then there is the issue of ergonomic comfort, which is probably 90% subjective, at least. I can see where they are coming from here, as well. While many here don’t mind or even like the design and layout of the Gen5 interior, I would hazard to guess that a majority of people who are not Camaro enthusiasts would have issues with it. Let’s face it, when the GT500’s first hit the showrooms, the interior design and materials were its biggest shortcoming, yet die-hard Mustang/Shelby guys reacted much like Gen5 owners do now and said things like “it’s not that bad” or “I didn’t but the car for its interior”, etc. However, the average person who did not have a special affection for the car tended to point out the interior as a shortcoming.

If you will just view the article for what it is, you will see that getting all bent out of shape for where a particular car is placed should not be an issue. If you feel anything less than a straight up performance comparison is stupid, then this particular article will only serve to make you angry.

Life’s too short to get riled up over any vehicle, let alone a magazine article that might have placed whatever beloved nameplate you prefer in a less-than-flattering light.

I have to agree this is not an "objective" article. It is almost completely subjective... And I'm afraid we all have to acknowledge that the Camaro has bad understeer when put to the limits. Not a factor for the average driver but for the performance minded, it is a problem...

We're just gonna have to let this one ride.

[chicagojoe16]

eh, the Camaro's a muscle car. I think it goes unstated that it's not as fancy or as drivable as more expensive cars but it is pretty offensive that the freakin' miata beat it. The Camaro outperformed the Miata, the BMW, and even the Z so I think the car got a pretty raw deal. The miata and BMW both aren't dream cars, who's going to lust after those two?

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by chicagojoe16

eh, the Camaro's a muscle car. I think it goes unstated that it's not as fancy or as drivable as more expensive cars but it is pretty offensive that the freakin' miata beat it. The Camaro outperformed the Miata, the BMW, and even the Z so I think the car got a pretty raw deal. The miata and BMW both aren't dream cars, who's going to lust after those two?

The Camaro did out perform those cars... but thats not what this test was about.

[gred04]

Originally Posted by GTengineer

Quit feeding the troll and quit giving MT hits on their page.

A lot of whinners here that didnt bother to READ the article. They said it was going to be based on the MT staff's subjective feelings with a little bit of feedback from the pro driver. Further the field was dictated by new for 09 sports ( sporty ) cars.

This was a stupid idea as everyone can agree and not much value for any reader/buyer.

However, take out the sedans, perform a real overall performance test ( handling and lap times using all professional drivers ) and the Camaro still loses pretty big against this field IMO.

The Camaro is a great looking muscle/SPORTY car with a sweet engine. Most reviews that I've read all pretty much say the same thing. Needs some additional work to be considered a sports car.

[chicagojoe16]

Originally Posted by shnomac77

The Camaro did out perform those cars... but thats not what this test was about.

Let's have a test where we decide on the best soda brand...but instead of doing anything useful I'll just list them in the order I like them. How enjoyable is it to drive the Miata when you're staring at 9 hot cars from behind?