GRM car reviews

I have a pitch. Instead (or as a supplement) to the new car reviews that we all know and love, how about some old car reviews? Not sister-mag old, but the junk the people on this forum typically drive. It could be combined with the buyers guide that pop up from time to time. Reliability, where to buy parts, how well a coke bottle fits in the armrest, how fast it feels etc. Just a regular old car review, but GRM style. Start with the trinity (is the P71 still in the trinity?) and work from there. heck, pick some random car out of readers rides and ask the owner if they'd like to write something up. I could sure use this kind of info, as could many of us, because as easy as it is to find out how the 350Z compared against it's competition, how much Jeremy Clarkson liked it, how fast it went around the ring, how many idiots wrecked theirs in balls of flame... it's indescribably hard to find any such information about a 240Z, or an E30, or a Turbobrick - especially given that it's 10-20-30 years since these cars were new and even if that info is around, it's pretty useless. For instance, I can find reviews of the original GTO, but they're next to useless because all of the cars were tuned on the spot (sometimes by the journalists!) to be ringers. Try buying a real '66 GTO and equalling the performance of some of those road tests with regular bias ply tires... Contrary to that, I can find reviews of a turbobrick, but nobody runs around on stock boost, that would be stupid.

Anyway, any takers?

That's kinda what the buyer's guides are for. Bigger and more in-depth than the new car reviews, with the benefit of hindsight.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/category/buyers-guides/

I'm open to requests/suggestions for others that have been in the magazine but don't yet appear online.

Tom Heath wrote: That's kinda what the buyer's guides are for. Bigger and more in-depth than the new car reviews, with the benefit of hindsight. http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/category/buyers-guides/ I'm open to requests/suggestions for others that have been in the magazine but don't yet appear online.

I guess the difference would be that a review would focus more on how the car actually is to drive, how it is to live with, to get stuff for, how often stuff breaks. Sort of a cross between what the buyers guides are now and an edmunds long term road test.

Maybe it might be something we could consider in upcoming buyers guides.

tuna55 wrote: Contrary to that, I can find reviews of a turbobrick, but nobody runs around on stock boost, that would be stupid. Anyway, any takers?

I must be stupid because I still have the stock boost on my turbo brick lol!

^+1

I have to say the wisdom of this forum is pretty awesome in that I can come here, ask a question and get feedback that is pretty well spot on for the things that are important to me.

I think something of this sort that expands on the buyers guide could in fact be pretty darn cool and worthwhile. Worth a thought anyway.

Bust things down for performance potential, hauling/towing potential, daily driver potential... give bonus points for badassery or if it may burst into flames at any given moment (Italian), easy to work on or whatever.

In short shine that special grassroots goodness on cars and let hilarity ensue.

In spite of what tuna said originally, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing reprints of old car tests, but copyright laws being what they are I doubt that could ever happen. But its fun to see the perspective of the time when reading the reviews. Besides, as I've noted previously, the photography was better years ago, they would actually show you what the car would look like from different angles while parked. Open up pretty much any car magazine these days (Except GRM of course) and it seems that mostly the cars are secondary to the artsy, fartsy and of course blurry photography.

plance1 wrote: In spite of what tuna said originally, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing reprints of old car tests, but copyright laws being what they are I doubt that could ever happen. But its fun to see the perspective of the time when reading the reviews. Besides, as I've noted previously, the photography was better years ago, they would actually show you what the car would look like from different angles while parked. Open up pretty much any car magazine these days (Except GRM of course) and it seems that mostly the cars are secondary to the artsy, fartsy and of course blurry photography.

This is true, and I would like those as well, just separately from what I've proposed. Murillee used to post them, he had a bunch of AMCs in a row. The Pacer was really really awful - in the 70-0 test that thing wanted to go anywhere but straight. The Javelin, on the other hand, did pretty well.

maybe a "learn me..." column. :D

While we can all jump online and ask I do like the idea of something added to the magazine. Say I don't really think I want a 88' Starion, or a 93' Escort GT. If its in the mag I'm going to read it regardless because I enjoy the articles. It could give me a new direction, since I tend to swap cars once a year.

I think it's a great idea. I'm fortunate enough to get to drive a wide variety of cars, but often it's on track at speed so I don't know as much about how something is for a DD. Here's my question: how do you find a stock example of a 10-20-30-year-old car to road test? Or which mods?

I'm wondering if there's a way to tap this online community to accomplish this. If someone took the time to find relevant comments on a model and compile that, then see what holes there are in the information, and ask for specifics from owners on this site, we could come up with something really useful. As a collection of internet comments it won't be particularly authoritative. But sort of like crowdsourcing, with enough input a very valid picture emerges. If someone who was a supporter of a particular car took the lead for that car, we could start to build a library of "compilations."

David

DWNSHFT wrote: Here's my question: how do you find a stock example of a 10-20-30-year-old car to road test? Or which mods? David

I think there are probably quite a few stock examples of just about everything out there. IMHO, to still be considered stock, mods allowed would be for wear items and stuff to make the car more reliable. I'd imagine the list of allowable mods to look something like this: shocks, exhaust, tires, wheels, brakes (or pads anyways), 5 speeds into LBC's, and V8's into rotary engined cars.

I like the direction of this thread.

How about taking someone's modified car and having the experts critique it and make suggestions to improve It? The owner tells you what he is trying to do with the car.

You could have a test day where, say, five cars show up. Three experts could drive all of them and give their separate opinions. Or each expert could comment on a different category; suspension, motor, etc. One car per issue and you have a ton of material.

Different car categories such as dd/autocrosser, dd/trackdays, track/hillclimb, etc. Whatever it is the owner is trying to do with it.

You would never run out of material. And you're using people's real world cars.

Just to be clear - I can speak for all of us when I say that the magazine is utterly the best thing in print today, and the website is my #1 hit by a long shot. This was just a thought I had because people will post something about wanting, I dunno, a FC for example, and get all sorts of responses. Some say it's great and perfectly reliable, some say it falls apart after 20 miles and parts are unobtainable. You may later on find out that only one person in the thread actually has ever driven the car, and it wasn't either of those people. It would just be nice to have some documented and authoritative real world testing. None of this "well, the cupholder trim came loose and therefore it's worse than a BMW" nonsense you get from OTHER car mags.

tuna55 wrote: (is the P71 still in the trinity?)

It never was.. Nor will be. Per came down on the anti P71 side very definitely years ago.

But I'd love to see him review one, and complain endlessly about driving a grandpas car.

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote: (is the P71 still in the trinity?)

It never was.. Nor will be. Per came down on the anti P71 side very definitely years ago. But I'd love to see him review one, and complain endlessly about driving a grandpas car.

So... there is no trinity? Whoa. My world is blown. Next you're going to tell me that there is no Santa!

tuna55 wrote:

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote: (is the P71 still in the trinity?)

It never was.. Nor will be. Per came down on the anti P71 side very definitely years ago. But I'd love to see him review one, and complain endlessly about driving a grandpas car.

So... there is no trinity? Whoa. My world is blown. Next you're going to tell me that there is no Santa!

No dude.. It's Miata, E30.. Astro van. Always has and always will be.

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote:

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote: (is the P71 still in the trinity?)

It never was.. Nor will be. Per came down on the anti P71 side very definitely years ago. But I'd love to see him review one, and complain endlessly about driving a grandpas car.

So... there is no trinity? Whoa. My world is blown. Next you're going to tell me that there is no Santa!

No dude.. It's Miata, E30.. Astro van. Always has and always will be.

Astro-van? Nah, nah, it's the E30, Miata, and AMC EAGLE!

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote:

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote: (is the P71 still in the trinity?)

It never was.. Nor will be. Per came down on the anti P71 side very definitely years ago. But I'd love to see him review one, and complain endlessly about driving a grandpas car.

So... there is no trinity? Whoa. My world is blown. Next you're going to tell me that there is no Santa!

No dude.. It's Miata, E30.. Astro van. Always has and always will be.

ughhh - at least there is a Santa.

Joe Gearin wrote:

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote:

Ignorant wrote:

tuna55 wrote: (is the P71 still in the trinity?)

It never was.. Nor will be. Per came down on the anti P71 side very definitely years ago. But I'd love to see him review one, and complain endlessly about driving a grandpas car.

So... there is no trinity? Whoa. My world is blown. Next you're going to tell me that there is no Santa!

No dude.. It's Miata, E30.. Astro van. Always has and always will be.

Astro-van? Nah, nah, it's the E30, Miata, and AMC EAGLE!

I thought the Cherokee had taken over one of those spots. Seems to be a very large amount of people here who both own a Miata and a Cherokee.

Welll I guess saying "Always will be" is a bit of a stretch. The E30 is getting a little long in the tooth and Astros won't be too far behind.

HalfTrac, Lord of the FWD deathbox wrote: I thought the Cherokee had taken over one of those spots. Seems to be a very large amount of people here who both own a Miata and a Cherokee.

naa There was discussion about that, but everyone came to the conclusion that the cherokee can't tow so out it went.

I like the idea. I volunteer my 1969 California Highway Patrol Polara. Lets compare it to a P71 or the new Hemi Charger cop car. Bet mine's faster in a straight line.

I'd volunteer my cars as well, but i'm not real close to you guys. And you'll have to sign a waiver before touching the Mazda.