CAR and other British automobile magazines

I don't get to England as often as I used to.

When I do, I always try to find Minstrels candies for our editor, and as many British automobile magazines as I can carry.

I use them as a metaphor transplant - I figure the Brits have been dealing with our language for a lot longer than we have; it stands to reason they use it very well.

Might as well borrow when you can. Steal from one source, that's plagiarism; steal from many sources, that's research.

It always amazes me how England can produce so many huge, high-quality car mags when their circulations are a fraction of their equivalents on this continent. Their advertising rates/production cost ratio must be totally different, or, as one ex-pat suggested, the fact that subscriptions are a much smaller part of their business model means more copies are sold at full cover price.

No Dick Clark/Ed McMahon low-ball subscription systems over there, I guess.

It is faintly amusing how these magazines seem to expect supercar handling prowess from even the cheapest crap-can Diesel-powered econobox - 'terminal understeer coming out of the roundabouts at full chat!' - but they're always fun to read.

It is generally agreed that CAR is the world's best English-language car magazine, although like all publications, it has had its ups and downs.

It has not been above the occasional subterfuge to claim a scoop, as when Georg Kacher wrote his 'driving impression' of the Dodge Viper some years ago. In the index, probably crafted by an intern, it said something to the effect that 'our man' drives the Viper. If you read the story carefully, nowhere does it actually SAY that Kacher drove the car; in fact he was a passenger with then-Chrysler boss Bob Lutz driving.

Oh well, they were first to print.

I was all ready to point out that they sometimes make misteaks (hey, who doesn't?) In the most recent issue I have (October 2008) they state that Mike Kimberly left Lotus for a 'top job with Lotus's then-parent General Motors in 1991, later running Lamborghini for them."

What? General Motors never owned Lamborghini! Chrysler did, yes.

Then I figured, OK, maybe that 'for them' was not intended to refer to General Motors, although it sure reads that way.

I would never get away with something like that; obviously, Wheels has better copy editors than CAR.

Sometimes they do get a bit carried away with those metaphors. The beautifully- if improbably-named Anthony ffrench-Constant gets so wrapped up in them that occasionally you forget what he is talking about.

The British references are also sometimes a bit opaque to us Colonials. If you didn't grow up watching Dr. Who on TV, you have no idea what a 'Tardis-like' interior is.

And while 'chauvinism' is based on a French word, it is no stranger to CAR's pages. Everything British is brilliant, everything American is crap. Example: in a Moroccan road trip story on the fabulous Audi R8, author Nick Trott waxes lyrical over the car's "Magnetic Ride" system, without mentioning that this system was invented by Delco, a former General Motors division, and was first used on various Cadillacs and Corvettes.

A deliberate omission, or just not enough space to include everything?

If I didn't see this sort of thing all the time, I'd give them the benefit of my considerable doubt.

They love Porsches (why not?) They hate BMW styling chief Chris Bangle - there are at least four pejorative references to the American-born iconoclast in this issue alone.

(No wait - he IS American. That might be enough.)

But they are seldom dull.

And I guess that's why we like them.

Most of the time.

Comments

[Nick B.]

Ah yes, the CAR magazine.

Indeed, it has seen better days, imo, with the likes of Ron Barker who praised a certain Renault model (or was it Citroen?) for having a special door slot perfectly sized for a 750ml wine bottle (he got into hot water over it for "promoting" drinking and driving), LJK Setright who occasionally submitted his articles to the publishers in Latin, and had opinions on most anything (and not always what you might have thought), Phil Llewellen, George Bishop, and many others whose names I have forgotten.

All great writers, and foremost automobile enthusiasts.

Mr. Barker, may God bless him, was a fanatical Alfa fan, and wrote many times about the models he owned; most drove him to despair and madness because they were always breaking down or in constant need of repair...LOL!!!
I can easily imagine him in Purgatory now fiddling with the Webers on his Giulia.

The old CAR magazine was THE Bible of all car magazines; they set the trend for others to follow, never held back an opinion on cars, often calling some utter rubbish or a waste of good metal, and praising some which you would think would be crap.

Their Good, Bad, and the Ugly review was classic; hilarious, biting, and true!

Glad you read the same, Mr. Kenzie.

[Paul Bisschop]

Jim, I've been reading your stuff from the beginning, it's probably the main reason I buy the Saturday Star.
GM is scratching it's head wondering why they can't sell vehicles. Now they're closing the truck plant that not long ago ran day and night. Please tell them to look in their own history books, and try hanging the Avalanche front sheet metal on their pick-ups. Did wonders for them last time. I know you're not a fan of the big SUVs and 'way too many bankers were driving pick-ups with no real need to. But a lot of them are still being used as real work vehicles, but does that mean we have to stare at that ugly, pseudo-macho face and ridiculously bulged wheel flares? Compare that with the simple, smooth-as-silk Avalanche front end and flanks. GM trucks always displayed this conservative restraint in the past, ignoring other makers' over the top trickery. Clearly, this is one time where breaking from the past was a mistake. Thanks, and keep up the good work. Sincerely, Paul