First off, I want to say that I'm a fan of MotorWeek; I have a Season Pass on my Tivo and I watch every episode.

However, it seems like, if you based your judgment of automobiles solely on their opinions, you'd conclude that there simply are no bad cars made today.

When you watch a show like Fifth Gear or Top Gear, they're not afraid to call a car "Brilliant"...they're also not afraid to call a car "Rubbish" either. Jeremy Clarkson has gone so far as to say something along the lines of "Anyone who buys one of these is an idiot." Tiff Needel has said "Sorry <car manufacturer>, you'll have to try harder to impress me."

Even CNet, which does "Car Tech" reviews of automobiles, won't pull punches. When they reviewed the new Audi A8, they concluded the segment by saying "Wow, that's a whole lot of money for not a lot of car".

And, it's true...not every car is great...unless you ask MotorWeek.

They're like the perpetually-cheerful friend that we've all got. No matter what, it's a GREAT day! And, when it's not a great day but, they're still bouncing around the office with this huge, stupid grin on their face, you just want to punch them.

In all of my years of watching MotorWeek, I've never heard them say anything along the lines of "Don't buy this car" or "You'd be better off getting <insert competitor's car name here>...instead".

Is it just me?

 

No, you are not wrong.

Motorweek is widely known as the 'sunshine out the @55' car review source. I too have it on a season pass on TiVO, but really just watch to see the videos of the interior (which pictures really don't suffice for for me for some reason). When they do mention something negative, I half the time expect something like:

"The wheel fell off and we rolled the car, but we got a great opportunity to test the airbags and new ACE body structure. We can definitely recommend this car for its safety features!"

On the flip-side, their short-term MPG loop I have found to be fairly realistic. As opposed to the MPG reported on their long-term updates, which, unfortunately, is not standardized and reflects the driving patterns, commutes, and styles of whoever happend to grab the keys during that period.

You can really tell when the staff did like a vehicle, however. Keep an ear out for the number of miles compared to the number of months they've had the car. I don't remember the vehicle, but one of last weekend's long-term updates had the car for 4 months with almost 12K miles on it. As opposed to the Jeep Grand Cherokee that they had for 6 months and had just over 3K on it.

Finally, every now and then one of the Pat Goss segments is particular informative...and actually true. The rest is filler and sunshine.

 

MotorWeek tends to be more complimentary in their reviews, but IMO it's a matter of style. Just like movie reviews. You have the critics who won't say a nice thing about any movie, and do a hatchet job on each one, all the way to the sycophants who sing praises of each one.

MotorWeek IMO does a consistent job of evaluation, and they do have substantive criticisms of their vehicles. Some of the criticisms I've seen, they've talked about understeer, tight rear seat room, difficulty of operating features, sluggish performance, and handling. But sometimes they do it in a more soft-peddled manner, whereas Jeremy Clarkson (or Simon Cowell on AI) may say "this thing is so ugly it makes me puke," MotorWeek tends to say "the styling is rather controversial, and drew mixed reviews from our driving team" -- but both mention that styling is potentially a weak point. The question is which one you prefer...the slam 'em, harsh approach or a more reserved one.

 

Fixed that for you

 

LOL, I suppose that is more accurate!

 

Dude thats awesome, that sounds just like them.

"This car's engine stopped running and the check engine light came on, but that allowed us to observe the brilliant lighting system on the dash of this wonderful car!"

 

Sounds like the year when my wife was in the shop frequently with her previous Mercedes for warranty repairs.

While waiting for her car she would get bored and buy me Mercedes sweatshirts and t-shirts which was nice for me at least....

 

Exactly! I've learned to "read between the lines"

 

But, who are their "customers"? I think it's us, the consumer; the viewing public. So, don't sugar-coat it. Don't gloss over it. If a car sucks, tell us it sucks!

It's more like they're pandering to the auto manufacturers, stating the negative points of each vehicle in the best possible light.

"While the backup camera on our test car was intermittent, the excellent acoustic insulation of the new BMW X5 meant that I didn't even hear my child scream when I backed over him"

 

I've watched Motorweek, off and on, for years. I know John Davis, the show's host, but just casually...I see him at auto shows (usually the Washington D.C. Auto Show) and we chat a little. Motorweek itself, in Owings Mills, MD, outside of Baltimore, is not that far from where I live.

John is generally a good auto reviewer, and, unlike some guys in the automotive press, a nice, easy-going guy to talk to. He's not arrogant with his opinions, and tries to look at the auto market from both the view of the manufacturer and the auto-buying customer.
I do agree, though, that the Motorweek auto reviews, though generally fair, are sometimes a little too much on the rosy-glasses side. But, remember, it is first and foremost a TV show (though they do have a website), and TV shows are often done more for entertainment rather then content. That's why, when I myself do a review, I do a substantial, unbiased, list of both PLUSSES and MINUSES....to try and give the reader a complete and exact understanding of just what he or she is getting for their money (Even my highest-rated vehicles, like the Acura RL, Lexus LS460, Lexus RX350, Subaru Outback, and BMW 335i, have a list of MINUSES as well). But, though Motorweek reviews aren't perfect, I certainly can't bad-mouth them.....John is a nice guy, and to be honest, I've seen (and read) far worse. Some of the old Motor Trend publications, for instance, were awful....I gave up on that magazine years ago.


As for Pat Goss, I've never met him personally, but I've listened to his radio call-in shows and took part in a few of his E-Mail chats. He is an excellent technician, especially in the area of automotive electrical/computer troubleshooting, but, in general, I think he gives too much credit to American-designed vehicles and not enough to Japanese/Korean-designed ones. He feels there is little if any difference, quality-wise, between the two. I generally disagree. He also, I think, goes overboard in his service recommendations to not only change but flush out transmission fluid, brake fluid, power-steering fluid, and radiator coolant every 2 years/24,000 miles. If everyone did that, they would spend a fortune in maintenance. I do firmly agree with his 3 month/3000 mile oil change intervals, though.

 

North America is too sensitive for these types of comments.

The worst is the car magazines.

 

These days, car magazines are probably the last place you should look for an unbiased review. No they're not natural born liars and cheats, they are responding to their own brand of economics.

• Magazines earn money by selling advertising. Very little magazine revenue comes from subscription and newsstand sales any more. That's why the heavy load of advertising. Ask yourself, :Who are the largest advertisers in most car mags?" You got it, it's the automakers!
  
  
• Who furnishes the (free) cars to test and provides the inside "scoop" on the auto industry? Right again!
  
  
• So when they provide most of the sources, the cars, and the advertising revenue that pays the salaries, the lights and the gas, who do you suppose gets the VIP treatment in the pages of said magazine? Right again!

It's really pretty sad that most of the car fanzines are in the pocket of at least one and probably more of the automakers - because they are the foundation that supports the magazine. I've complained for years about the miserable grade of automotive news in the newspapers and on TV - most coverage is nothing more than a corporate Valentine for the sponsors and advertisers.

In a way, the system works to the benefit of the publisher - since if Ford advertised heavily in your favorite magazine and GM never spent a dime there, who do you think will get the best reviews, will win the comparo's and who will get the "Car of the Year" trophy?

GM needs to pony up sufficient ad bucks just to keep these reviews from being one-horse races.

It should be pretty transparent that most reviews are bought and paid for. That's why I'm beginning to prefer to get my comparison data from online resources like Mike. Knowledgeable reviewers who think like adults who don't have a particular axe to grind, or manufacturer to bow down to; they are the new breed of automotive journalists. The ones with integrity.

Mike, I guess the guys at Subaru aren't getting on board the program . . . after all, you deserve a shiny new ride!

 

only unbiased review is your behind in the drivers seat for the test drive.... nothing else comes close.

 

There is a reason why that inane show is on at 7 am on saturday mornings.......because the only people up at that hour are meth heads and senior citizens!

No one takes it serious and it's the bastard 55 and over free meal from Dennys! If I want to know how a car performs, I will drive it! It's sad that 90% of the opinions in here are based on such reviews instead of real world driving but that is just the nature of the beast!

good write up (OP)

 

as a tv show, motorweek sucks. yah the host is nice and all, but damn is this show boring to watch. the format are almost like commercials for the cars they review, only showing a brief number of actions shots and the host just reading off the spec sheet.