As you know, I find Peter's rants to be worthy reading, even if I don't agree with a lot of the stuff he says. There's no question that he is a master of thought-provoking journalism—and that he is also very Detroit-biased...
 
Having said that, he clearly was off-base with his statements about you and Edmunds.

Karl, that was your best blog yet. Wow.

That's a really cool list of cars. Wish I had room to keep 5 cars, always see old stuff I want to buy.

As I said in the previous blog entry, he was off-base in calling Karl "anti-Detroit". However, to call Peter "Detroit-biased" is also off-base. His site was built on ripping Detroit a new one. Yeah, sometimes he gets a bee in his bonnet about one thing or another, but on the whole I find him to be pretty fair handed. That is, he's just as likely to give Toyota "three up arrows" for, say, sales gains and "three down" for over-hyping their "greeness". Same goes for GM, etc., etc.
 
Again - in this case he was flat-out wrong. IMHO.

I don't know, sometimes I get the sense that his "Detroit-ripping" is done more for appearance than for sheer journalistic accuracy. Either way, he gets the bulk of his income from the Detroit Three, and while he doesn't necessarily hide that fact it's something people should keep in mind as they read his "reporting."

Karl, sometimes people feel like what they are preaching is the pure true and the rest just follow. Fortunately we live in a country where we have unlimited choices of car brands, models and prices. Of course we do not have the french or the totality of the Italians cars here in the USA. But Detroit had the market in their hands for many decades and they let it go. I don't bash them but I do remember when I was little my parents both Fords, Dodges and Chevrolets. Then later we found that the little Datsun, Toyota and VW will do the same job for less and on top of that reliable. Don't get me wrong the new Saturn roadster and sedan are sharp! Ford Fusion is nice! GMC Denali is cool!! But the rest...... Is the law of the market and you need to be in top.

Karl, Karl, Karl -
  
I'm glad you got your shorts in a bunch, it really made my day. I'm really impressed with your editorial roster and all - and your selection process is, uh, what it is. Does it impart automatic credibility to your choices? In your narrowly-focused world, perhaps. I happen to believe any list that leaves off such cars as the Ford GT (you have one, you lucky dog, so you should know better); the Corvette and Corvette Z06; the Cadillac SRX; the Saturn Sky Red Line or Pontiac Solstice GXP (yes, I know you Miata freaks out there just wouldn't stand for their perennial favorite car to have any real competition, but get over it); Ford Fusion; Cadillac V-Series; Hummer H3 and the new GM full-size SUVs (and you and your illustrious staff members went for the Mercedes GL? Un-frickin'-believable!) - decidedly lacks fundamental credibility.
  
You can defend it all you want, but you're clearly stewing in your own press clippings, or else you're flat-out blind to the fact that you ignored some excellent, even outstanding machines. But in the end, it's your list - and heaven help me for having the temerity to criticize it. (I'm sure I will rot in some Edmunds-orchestrated Hell, where I will be subjected to a non-stop audio loop of you pontificating to Micki Maynard of the NY Times about the business - I'd rather you just take me out back and shoot me).
  
As for your list of personal cars, what the hell was that all about? Yes, I could go through my list of vehicles for the benefit of your frantically devoted readers (what shall we call them by the way - Karl-istas? Brauer Buddies?), but what would that accomplish? Yes, I have had many cars too and suprisingly enough, most of them have been imported, including 10 different Porsche 911s. There's a shocker, huh? Right now, my personal driver is a Cadillac STS V-8 RWD and I hate making car payments just like everyone else. But who cares, ultimately? If you've lived life at all you've had a procession of cars - from great to resolutely forgettable - so congratulations, pat yourself on the back - and do us all a favor and please move on.
  
And I'm really glad you brought up the Business Week article too. For the record, I am not consulting for any domestic automaker, and I haven't for a long time. I consulted for Chrysler going on four years ago. And I've done some consulting stints since, all brief, but in no way, shape or form does it constitute "being on the bankroll" as you put it. I do other things for my income which is none of you or your readers' damn business. But bought and paid for by the what's left of the not-so-big-three? Please. Get your facts straight next time, oh wait, you're not exactly in the "facts" business are you, Karl? Doesn't Edmunds now operate above the fray, dispensing your breathtaking wisdom for the hungry multitudes to gobble up with a "thank you, sir - may I have another" eagerness - or is it just blind faith?
  
Whatever.
  
It's clear you know absolutely nothing about me or Autoextremist.com. We spend our time out front and leading the discussions on the urgent issues of the day in this industry. We talk about things others will only talk about in "deep background" or totally "off the record." One of the people commenting in this forum got it right - I have been the most blistering critic of Detroit for 7-1/2 years now. I will praise an automaker when I see fit, and then I will hammer them relentlessly - sometimes even in the same issue, if not the same paragraph. I have become the most influential national columnist writing about this industry through hard work, dedication and a relentless will to call it as I see it.
  
As I've said time and time again, one week I'm a hero, and the next week I'm an a**hole. I guess this week I'm the latter in Edmunds-land. And do you know what? It feels damn good and so be it.
  
Before Autoextremist made its debut on June 1, 1999, this business, as covered by the order-taking media,

Ford GT? Now you just shot yourself in the foot, Petey. The list was for 2007 model year. And we're to believe an "expert automotive journalist" wouldn't know that GT production ended months ago and that the factory where it was built is scheduled to be shut down? Talk about "decidedly lacks fundamental credibility"... I guess you aren't in the "facts business" either.

Sorry, Pete, but I've gotta side w/Karl on this one. Edmunds is pretty on the money with their vehicle evaluations. I'm a wholehearted supporter of domestic brands- they constitute too much of our economy to NOT be a fan of domestic brands. But the vehicles that those brands put out aren't always the best; that's not to say that the converse of that is necessarily true, but jeez- Edmunds is right, there are a lot of cases in which domestic vehicles simply aren't the best, even if they aren't far behind the class leaders.
 
Case in point: the (late) Ford Taurus & Dodge Caravan. Have you driven either lately? They were segment leaders once. Top of the charts. Yes, there are bright spots in Detroit (pretty much all been named here), but remember that the bright spots constitute maybe, oh, 25% of what Detroit's putting out.

Part II...
  
was a blissful walk in the park, an exercise in mind-numbing mediocrity and a cozy, sleepy haven for a bunch of under achieving automatons who thought the gravy train would last forever.
  
I'm proud to say Autoextremist.com, a true original, helped change all that.
  
And whether or not you want to admit it, Karl, Autoextremist.com helped plow the road ahead so that you and your staff can do what you do now too. But that's okay, you don't have to acknowledge that fact, because there are plenty of other credible people in this business who do it for us every single day.
  
This little chat has been fun, but now I'm going to leave you with a little piece of advice: This business, Hell, this country has become a cesspool of three-minute sound bites, a glib-fest of mewling and howling signifying nothing - with all the depth of a layer of clear-coat to boot. In other words, shallow and surface-oriented counts for deep and meaningful these days.
  
Or, to be more precise, image, unfortunately, is everything.
  
And the "image" of your "Most Wanted" list suggests that you and your editors have adopted the lemming-like mantra of the so-called media "intelligentsia" out there who subscribe to the deeply held belief that Detroit = Bad and that Imports = Good, with no exceptions - at least none worth mentioning.
  
Even though you've gone out of your way to insist otherwise, Karl, that is exactly the impression you have given us.
  
And that's the High Octane Truth of the matter.
  
At any rate, it has been a blast and by the way, this is the first and last time I have ever participated in a forum (if I attempted to track down all of the vitriol posted on the web about me every day I couldn't get any work done).
  
Thanks for listening...
  
Peter M. DeLorenzo
Publisher
Autoextremist.com

LOL
 
Again, I don't agree with everything Peter says, but that was entertaining. ;-)

This is great! I wish stuff like this was posted everyday/
 
I know now that I am not crazy and that others out there share my frustration with Edmunds. Edmunds attempts to cater to the people who visit their site and their data shows that the most frequently researched cars are imports. Edmunds seems to share the view of so many media types and car buyers these days; that buying imports is the only rational thing to do for an intelligent, well read, internet savvy buyer. While they cant come out and say it, the suggestion is that the only people who buy domestics are under educated, patriotic, red staters who are too closed minded to recognize the superiority of the Japanese.
 
I get criticized for not bowing to that logic and people honestly believe that the fact that I don't worship everything coming from Japan or Germany means that I am biased towards Detriot. I see the same is being said about Pete and that isnt the case because I have read his articles and he FREQUENTLY criticizes the Big 3. I don't agree with all of his criticisms but most of them seem fair unlike what I read in many other media outlets. The logic being used by people like Karl is that anyone who dares suggest that domestic products arent as bad as he says and imports arent as perfect as he says is biased or somehow compromised by their relationship with the Big 3. That is beyond absurd. The fact of the matter is that when you look at things objectively there are many competitive Big 3 vehicles (mostly GM) that deserve consideration amongst buyers but wont get that consideration because so many press members cannot let go of what Detroit was putting out 5, 10 or 20 years ago. If you want to rank vehicles on snob appeal, brand image or resale value that is one thing, but if you rank vehicles on styling, value, performance, ergonomics, etc. than many domestic models look pretty good.

"Detroit = Bad and that Imports = Good", Petey? Talk about short-attention span theater. 2006 had seven domestics on the list and 2005 had nine. With fewer categories in those years, that was about a third of the total. Speaking which, those years also had the Solstice, 'Vette, GT and GM 'utes that you look for in a "credible" list.
 
1487, I go to edmunds.com and I see "New Cars" and "Used Cars" as well as an ad for Chrysler. Clicking on "New Cars" gives me a list of makes and surprise! Domestic makers are rendered in the same font as imports. The fact that people research imports more than domestics tells me that people are interested in imports more than domestics. How does that stat indicate an editorial bias?

I also have to say I am wondering why Edmunds is so self righteous when it comes to it's awards. Have you guys ever read any other magazines? What makes you think MT or C&D do not have criteria for their awards and do nothing but hand out awards evenly to all manufacturers? That is one of the most absurd things I have ever read on here. C&D gives out at least 5 of it's 10Best awards to the SAME freakin cars every single year. The 3 series, Vette and Accord almost have permanent slots on the list, the Accord has been on there almost 20 straight years. You will never find Hyundais, Buicks, Saturns, etc. on the 10BEst list because the list is heavily tilted towards sports cars and sports sedans. YOi will always find BMWs, Audis, Porsches and Mazdas on the list, I dont really call that spreading the wealth around across the whole industry.
 
"Occasional home runs won't win this World Series, and the continued mis-steps by the domestics (Compass, Cobalt, Five-Hundred) confirm that consistency is still an issue in Detroit. "
 
Karl you are virtually obsessed with Cobalt bashing for reasons I just don't get. Not a week goes by that you arent reminding us how much you don't like this car. There is nothing wrong with the Cobalt objectively. Just because you personally feel that it's interior is subpar doesnt mean the general consensus is that the car is poor effort by GM. Even C&D liked the Cobalt and they are not known to be GM fans by any stretch. The car is quiet, has a powerful engine, has two body styles, a high performing Coupe model, a nice ride and has a great price. This car is in no way an example of GM dropping the ball.
 
As for the 500, I'm no big fan but there is nothing wrong with the car that a bigger motor cant fix. It is large, has a nice interior, a huge trunk, decent styling that is no worse than anything coming from Honda, Hyundai or Toyota and it's handling is actually respectable. Again, how is this an example of "incosistency" or lousy execution? It seems to me that you pick out certain (OK most) domestic vehicles and pick them apart based on your preferences and than pronounce them failures as if that is the final word. BTW, I recently saw the Consumer Auto Guide that rates all 2007 vehicles and the 500 is named a Best Buy for full size cars and the Cobalt was called a great value and worthy option in the compact class. As I said, your pronouncements are not fact, just your opinion and in many cases other sources do not agree with your "the domestics aren't competitive" stance.

Wow. Your usual internet flame war, but it's between two relatively important people. Only this time we can't say "oh I'm sure they're both just 13 year olds" - not I realize we've been unfair to 13 year olds the whole time.
 
Mr. DeLorenzo in particular, I hoped for better manners from you. It's clear you enjoy this and that's kind of sad.

7driver,
 
most internet sites get more hits for research of import models, not just Edmunds. The top 10 list for most researched cars never matches the top ten best selling cars in any month or year. You can read into that what you will, but the bottom line is that people who buy Accords, Camrys and Mazda3s spend a lot of time researching their cars. I think Edmunds believes that those numbers prove that no one cares about domestic cars and thus their opinions are validated. Personally, I don't think editors should make choices based on what they think the audience expects but that seems to be the case here.
 
What I have yet to figure out is how they explain why many vehicles not on their "most researched" list manage to outsell many vehicles that are heavily researched. My guess is that they would just say fleet sales. That is usually the answer whenever anti-domestic people are asked about a successful Big 3 vehicle. In other words, no one researches the Impala or F150 because they are mostly fleet sales not sold to individuals. Either that or the people buying "American" are too stupid to be internet savvy.

BTW what’s the story behind NY Times? I read this newspaper propbably couple of times in my life and it was only business section, so what’s the statement - is the NY Times a new incarnation of Pravda? Intelligentsia hates the country where it lives and aspires to bring it down like it was demonstrated in a country the word “intelligentsia” came from. The motivation for this behavior - to establish kind of World Government based on secular ideology like socialism or even better communism so national governments should be brought down and disappear. USA is the worst enemy of intelligentsia. But Japan is not a friend either. Just wanted to clarify this point. So what Karl has to do with Intelligentsia?

Calisimo gets credit for the best post yet. Love the 13-year-old reference -- very funny! :)

Here's what Edmund's has to say about the Editors' Most Wanted List: Why the list: " .... readers want to know which cars and trucks we'd buy given the resources." Selection Process: "We voted for our 31 favorite models in a variety of vehicle classes, plus we chose our Most Significant Vehicle of the Year." "The result of our voting is a list of cars and trucks we'd want in our own garages." "Our Selections Were Guided as Much by Our Hearts as Our Heads" Clearly, the list is entirely a reflection of the personal preferences of the editors. Personal preferences always include biases. If the editors are biased against domestic vehicles, those vehicles will be less likely to make a list of cars and trucks they would want in their own garages. So, unless Karl can describe how personal biases are eliminated during the selection process, let's put aside the silly notion that the list is unbiased. Keep in mind that biases don't have to be conscious, let alone intentional.

I just think Edmunds people are biased to performance-oriented brand like Honda and BMW. Well..Perhaps domestic cars are not exciting enough to win their loves. I don't think Toyota will or can build the "best" cars in every cateagory since Toyota's purpose is to sell as many cars as they produce not to design a sporty car that less people will love to buy

Funny, I always had the feeling that Karl had a soft spot for domestics.
 
Anyone?
 
-Sabastian

I don't think I see alot of USA bashing here, but I do think that the Ameircan automotive press, in general, is harder on the domestic brands. Cas in point, I ahev read in several places, articles bashigng Chrysler for it's brand engineered Aspen/Durango and GM for it's Cobalt/G5 twins. No one seems to be bothered that Honda sells it's Civic in Canada as an Acura ( Shades of Cimmaron....) and that they sell the Euro Accord in the USA as an Acura too. What about the fact that Toyota is now selling some cars that are of lesser quality than those of GM or that Nissan interiors have inferior materials and quality than most dometics? Yes, America bashing does go on...

Carmelguy, you have a point about the Accord - TSX connection, but what makes that situation different is that in the United States, the Euro Accord and the TSX are not sold side-by-side. The American Accord and the Acura TSX are two different cars whereas the Cobalt and G5 are not. What you are describing is national rebadging. An example would be that in England, the mainland European brand, Opel, is sold under the name Vauxhall. It's rebadging but not duplication of products.
 
-Sabastian

The general trend I see with Edmunds editors is they prefer either highly technical cars such as Hybrids, or RWD performance cars (especially those Euros !!).
 
Ok, hybrids are indeed more interesting due to advanced complexity, RWD is the preferred layout as it allows controlled oversteer, drifting and burnouts (are editors racers at heart?), and Euros push performance envelopes harder.
 
But it might be worthwhile to do a little more forum sifting as well as the test drive to help select the "best" cars. Example: that nifty handling Audi A3 DSG has a tendency to break its clutches, yet Audi refuses to fix under warranty (they claim driver abuse (huh?? how ya do that with no clutch pedal?)). Should that car be given a "best" rating ?

Hello Karl, I thought that I should title this post as "the voice of reason..." kinda like Peter Gammons on Baseball Tonight. First off, I want to say that you've done great work on your reviews and your editorials...I often find myself agreeing with what you say, especially when it comes to the miscues of the Big 2.5.
However, to play devil's advocate, I just want to point out how it sometimes does look like Edmunds.com as a whole takes somewhat of an import slant...for instance, stacking up a nearly fully-loaded Camry against the base-level Aura, or comparing much more expensive and far less practical BMW 3-series to cheaper, much more value-packed Japanese imports. My point is, is sometimes I feel that Edmunds.com tries to give the impression that it is a well-balanced and reasonable voice in the wilderness of corrupt automotive journalism, when it actually sometimes succumbs to the usual thrill-seeking but inherently worthless journalism of the coffee table magazines. You have no real formula for judging these cars a la consumer reports - you rely on opinions. And quite frankly, opinions are wrong more often than not, especially if they are dominated by middle-aged white males.
This is not to say that I do not think that you take your job seriously. I honestly believe that you are trying your best to offer fair, merit-based assessments of cars so that everyday people can use them to purchase their hard-earned vehicles. However, I hope that you remember that most of us, heck, ALL of us will NEVER buy a Ford GT or a Cadillac STS-V or a BMW M5.
While, we of course love to read about them and see videos about them...the bottom line is, I would like to see Edmunds.com try to do comparison tests that take real-world scenarios in mind (i.e. price) and to leave their enthusiasm for taking corners at 60 mph at the door. Also, why is the atrocious reliability of German cars such as BMW, Audi, and Mercedes never mentioned?? Just reading your website, I could easily assume that a Land Rover is as reliable as a Buick - when we all in fact know that such a scenario is less realistic than pigs flying.
And while you seem to give my fellow countrymen (Korea) a lot of slack in improving their vehicles...how about giving some due credit to GM, Ford, etc when they do offer improved product. After all, serious improvements are serious improvements, it's just that the starting point may be worse in some vehicles than others. Hope these suggestions help explain why some of us do feel that there is some anti-domestic bias...but keep up the good work!

Funny how seriously people take car lists, which are only the assembled opinions of other people.
 
The auto industry praised the CTS. I drove it and in my opinion they were dead wrong about the car. Who is right? Well for my garage, I'm right.
 
Seriously, why would this guy bug over Edmunds listing foreign cars? Does he believe Edmunds is incredibly influential or maybe that Americans are easily swayed by lists online?
 
Edmunds could list the entire toyota lineup on their Editor's Most Wanted list and that would influence my decision in absolutely no way, shape or form.

Edmunds writers say over and over again, if you want to find the best "appliance", check out Consumer Reports. Edmunds is for "car guys" (or girls). They admit their "fun-to-drive" bias. They weigh performance heavily, and they try to be objective with their measurements. They also emphasize the way cars look and feel and make you feel.
 
So what? Opinions are like... you know the rest... everybody has one.
 
Edmunds also says repeatedly, there are few "bad cars" today. Almost all of them are fairly reliable. So why not pick the one that's the most fun?
 
I always get the impression that Edmunds writers are rooting for the home team. They give credit where credit is due. But when you get down to it, the things that Edmunds weighs more heavily are the things the domestics lag behind, on average. Fit and finish, sophistication, sporty handling.

Well, I've already heard this whole fight over at Autoblog, and frankly I'm kinda tired of hearing a bunch of children lash out at one another. What cars would YOU put on that list for 07? I keep hearing about how these horrible journalists have filled our ears with garbage, if that may be true, please don't point it out unless you have the truth in hand. I'm being serious, I'd like to see alternate, tightly argued lists that back up this mudslinging.
I for one can't think of too terribly many changes that I would make to the list, and I certainly don't care from where each car on there comes from. I think people would do well to remember that Domestic automakers got to the top by competing and winning. Also, that they got where they are now on their own as well. The truly sad thing about most of this debate is that it is argued by some of the least educated people around. You don't like what someone says, fine, that's why this talk back feature is provided. But if you have a better "way" please don't start of by saying that there is an us or them. Say your peace, but construct a logical and fact based argument.
So, yeah, if you think the list is crap, tell me WHY, not just that it is. I think a little more self-reflection would be good for most commenters.

Please excuse this ultra long post but I had to react. I've read all this bitching with extreme amusement. Surely this argument is more about patriotism then cars. Edmunds is not bashing Detroit but simply reflecting a simple fact; that people are buying more imported cars...... Why? Mainly because the quality on US brand cars is crap. Do not confuse this with the quality of workmanship as it has been proved by the many import brand cars built in the US that Americans can build great cars, but rather in the design and more importantly the materials chosen. Take almost any US car and you can see where the corners have been cut in the interior; the nasty cheap hard plastics in GM's brands, the crappy stereo's in Fords etc. This is done by the accountants in Detroit in order to squeeze as much money as possible out of the US consumer. Why do you think that US cars are mainly sold in the US? You don't see crappy Malibu's and the such like dumped on the European's or Japanese markets. They simply would not put up with such rubbish, as has been seen by Cadillac's constant sales slumps every time they try to launch in Europe until they stopped and launched something exclusively for the market (the BLS - still crap though, and a re-hashed Saab). They rely on Americans sense of patriotic duty to buy this crap at over inflated prices in order to make large profits in order to pay the Unions and their own pockets. This once happened in Britain and was the reason that the UK no longer has a domestic car industry (all the existing brands are owned by non UK companies). Now that the US buying public has been offered alternatives in reasonably priced (for the most part) Euro and Japanese products they are taking them, hence the slump in domestic brand sales. The Detroit three are capable of making fantastic cars, but they don't want to bring them here for some reason. Why does Europe have the fantastic Focus Mk II (including the ST and soon to be RS) while we have the old Mk I. Why are they getting a drop dead gorgeous new Mondeo while we have the dull 500 and almost-ran Fusion? Why does Europe get the Opel/Vauxhall Vectra & Astra while the US has the Ion, Malibu and other laughable machinery? Don't get me started on DC...... the 300c/Charger for all their superb qualities are still built on a LAST generation Merc platform while the Germans get the new advanced chassis for their C/E Class. Same with the beautiful Crossfire, sadly built on the original SLK platform with an interior that had no place in a $30k+ car, the plastics were cheap and nasty. This gives most of the Chrysler line up last generation dynamics, plain and simple. Finally though the message is getting across, GM is bringing over the Vectra as the Saturn Aura (although STILL no manual box) and then the Astra, the Pontiac's are going to share bits with Holden of Oz (who make good rear drivers) and when they do get it right, the cars get bought (Solstice/Sky). Now Ford needs to bring it's Euro spec Focus over, and the Mondeo, and Chrysler needs to build it's cars on Merc's CURRENT platforms and stop selling cheap rubbish to the biggest car market in the world, or else people will continue to buy good quality cars from whoever offers them. Thusly in returning to this argument of the Most Wanted list. these choices are simply reflecting the current state of affairs. I certainly wouldn't buy anything from Detroit's main brands (yet) but finally they've started appearing on my radar for the future. If Edmunds is at fault, then so is current public opinion and that makes the Detroit protecters the one's most guilty of Detroits fall from grace. It's the law of business and nature that only the fittest survive. Detroit needs to get fit again and this doesn't happen without pain. Bottom line if the US brands continue to dump mediocre products on the American consumer, they will die. If they stop and offer competitive products, they'll survive. It's not the media's job to prop up the bu

Oh man this is funny I have to come back here later and read it all in detail.

If Euros don't cut corners like American manufacturers do, then why do they have bad reliability records here?
  
During my auto engineering days with the biggest of the big 3, one major Euro brand (with very high priced products) selected our __cheapest__ A/C components with the shortest life spans. An odd choice for a "luxo" brand to make.
 
Make no mistake, I appreciate the Euro emphasis on ride _and_ handling, something USA manufacturers have trouble with. But how about weighing Edmunds choices on a little less flash and some more reliablity ? Or are $30K+ cars now considered disposable products?

I personally thought there were too many domestics on the Edmunds list. Who wants a Dodge Magnum?

I have no inherent animosity against domestic brands, in fact I have owned numerous domestic vehicles in the past, however, they have all been utter crap! I have even gone through the motions of test driving a few in the last few years, and frequently drive rentals. What have I discovered? That they are still crap! The only reason they still sell any vehicles is american jingoism, our big 3 wouldn't dream to try to sell any domestic vehicle elswhere in the world and expect to sell anything! I personally haven't met a single buyer of japanese brands that has ever bought domestic vehicles ever again. So no, its not bias, its just facts. For decades domestics have been building cars that are at best mediocre, while asian brands have built ever more refined, frugal, safe, reliable and better performing vehicles. Detroit on the other hand, abandoned the car and exploited the SUV, relics of ancient technology which for the gave the consumer a false sense of virility. Like all empty promises the SUV hit the brick wall of reality, they were unsafe, had little passenger utility and wasted copious amounts of ever more expensive gas, in the mean time asians developed the modern car SUV/car crossover which fixed some of the SUV deficiencies. So now it stands that domestic manufacturers are back in the engineering curve at least 2 generations and are finding difficult if not impossible to catch up. Personally, I find it hard to belive that ford or chrystler will survive, GM is showing some signs of life but still has a long way to go. So no its not anti domestic bias, its simply reality.

kurtamaxxxguy: I never said Euro's don't cut corners, VW Passat brakes are crap and need replacing every 15k miles and VW are now paying for the lack of quality by having their sales hit hard. However this doesn't appear when you first look at a car and when a car's just come onto market that's when it sells the most. Most people buying new cars want the latest models and you can't judge a models true reliability until it's been on the market at least 3 years by which time it's only a few years until it's due to be replaced. I agree that more reliability data is important, but it's not logistically possible due to the way people buy cars. Being mechanically minded probably makes you wiser then most of the buying public in that you won't rush to buy the latest model, however you are sadly a minority.

I feel this whole domestic versus import debate is crap, especially since it is based on what badge a vehicle wears rather than where it was actually built or how much content came from where. Who cares what badge is glued onto the body of the vehicle? How domestic is a Chevrolet Aveo other than the bowtie? Why is it that I'm patriotic if I buy a Fusion built in Mexico, but un-patriotic if I buy a Camry built in the USA? A Mexico-built Ram, or USA-built Tundra?
 
Is it just me, or does it seem like the auto journalists are being bullied into liking domestics? This DeLorenzo vs. Brauer childishness is a classic example. GM pulling their advertising from the L.A. Times because the reviewer didn't like the Pontiac G6 is another good example. If the domestics don't win the majority of the classes, then it must be because of anti-domestic bias... no other reason. Nevermind the fact that if you look at most of the categories, the domestics are a minority. In some categories, there aren't even domestic vehicles available. I suppose the proper thing for Edmunds to do would be to drop that category entirely, right?
 
It is absolutely sheer arrogance to think that just because a car wears an import or domestic badge that it is automatically better. People should buy what they like. If a vehicles doesn't sell, it's not the buyers' faults. If entire brands don't sell very well, it's not the buyers' faults. Apparently, those products that aren't selling are weak and/or not meeting the needs and wants of the buyers.
 
Automotive publications have very little to do with it. Most of their readers are enthusiasts, and we're going to buy what we want regardless of what the journalists say. Most buyers don't read the various automotive publications out there. They are much more swayed by advertising, what they see driving on the road, and their own personal experiences. If they had bad experiences with a particular brand, chances are they'll never buy that brand again, no matter how much they're told about how much that brand has improved. And it doesn't matter if that brand is an import or domestic.
 
As for Mr. DeLorenzo... I used to enjoy reading your rants and raves, and the reason I stopped reading has nothing to do with this debate... it stems much further back. But I can't believe that you can be so angry about the lack of domestic vehicles on a list when you're advocating changing the USA into a socialist state just to save the domestic auto industry. I'm sure our founding fathers would have rather drive an import vehicle than make the changes you are advocating.

Firsty, let me say to Karl that owning old American muscle does not count for you liking current "American" cars. Muscle cars are essentially pointless and pieces of junk but let's get to modern times... 
Secondly, I own an import car (Mazda3 hatch) although if my pockets were deeper, I'd have a Saab 9-3 or a used Seville STS. However, I've been an avid GM supporter since joining Edmunds back in '99. Compared to the other two American brands, GM has by far been more innovated (mostly with Cadillac) than the Ford and Chrysler combined. A lot of GMs tech was critized when it was first introduced and now that BMW and Benz want to charge a fortune for them, it's acceptable. Think- head up display, massaging/adaptive seats, auto damping suspensions, automatic lighting, digital instrumentation, sport shit algorithm transmissions, etc. Now the Civic (S2000 first) have digital dash compotents and the S class doesn't even have physical gauges yet both are accepted. Seems like bias to me. This is meerly one example and the list goes on and on....
Lincoln has pretty much fizzled to absolutely nothing and the LS was a poorly executed program that had plenty of potential. However, I like what I see in the Edge/Fusion/500/Freestyle. Actually, the new Duratec 35 should solve all of the problems of the vehicles I've just mentioned (along with manumatic shiters and a new radio).
Chrysler... What can I say? They've built cars that people like (for American reasons i.e. BIG) however I am not impressed with the 300/Chargers. The interiors seem cheap to me especially in the back seat areas. Also, you cannot tell me that the base 300/Charger V-6 versions with those high profile hard all season tires and soft suspension handle any better than a well damped FWD sedan of similar price. This whole RWD thing is blown completely out of proportion and GM would've got hammered if the introduced a last generation iron block OHV V-8 in a freshly design mainstream sedan. I cannot tell you how many people up here in the the N.East have the archaic 3.5L six cylinder (the 300M peformed no better than GM's 3800 V-6 competitors)Magnums/300s/Chargers simply because they are big and imposing rather than because they are RWD and have neutral handling. Gimme a break with the donated previous generation E-Class chassis/positive MB influence song and dance. Last I checked, that generation E-class was never known to be that great of a handler (excluded AMG) and adding 8" to the wheelbase doesn't help either. However, at least these cars have personality and that's what causes them to sell.
Basically, I seperate GM from the other two although Ford is showing signs with some decent products. Let me get to the point. To me, in no way shape or form have Toyota or Honda (what most people really mean when they say Import) been "leaders" in introducing desirable product. The Pilot especially bothers me as it doesn't even look styled- just constructed. I could've designed a more creative looking truck from my old Lego blocks back in the '80s. Back on topic- most people buy them because they aren't "car guys" and just want a dependable car to go from A to B and there is nothing wrong with that. As an enthusiast, it makes me to sick to see the pedastal they are placed on simply because of their perceived reliability. This is a double standard that only works for affordable cars because BMW's have not been known to be anymore problem free than any other maker yet they are praised for their man/machine interface and that somehow takes precedence over a Honda or Toyota's no frills reliable commuter car personalty. BMWs are also HORRIBLE values in their respective classes but that gets thrown out the door. This leads me to believe that new models introduced by the Big 3 in the affordable range will be inferior because they aren't up to Toyota's boring standards of good plastics and perceived reliability. This in spite of the fact that Toyota

Karl,
That was a thoughtful rebuttal and pretty convincing. The only thing is, bias is something that few would admit to having, but of course everyone does to a greater or lesser extent.
I think when I detect clear-cut bias at Edmunds, and others, it's when critical remarks have a vicious tone to them, where there seems to be sneering going on beneath the print. Whether you believe it or not, I think it's clear that most automotive journalists feel especially free to get sarcastic or jabbing when they talk about GM or their products, which is rarely justified by an objective appraisal of the current form of the company and its extremely wide range of vehicles. For example, was it fair that article after artlcle hit the press a year or so ago about GM going bankrupt? I don't think so. It was a constant barrage, almost gleeful in the spectacle of it all. Thankfully, you all turned out to be wrong. But I can guarantee that it cost GM quite a few more sales, with people worrying about the future of their service or warranty. Or what about how GM recalls tend to make headline news here and elsewhere, whereas Toyota recalls (which have been out of control in the last year) are usually buried under a different headline, if they get published at all? When double standards are in evidence, that is bias, and I have several times felt that way when reading articles in Edmunds.
Sometimes double standards are much more subtle, mainly when the weaknesses of import brands seem to be softly mentioned or ignored altogether, while the weaknesses of domestic brands are put in the spotlight. How many times have we read about the horror that the new Escalade does not have a telescopic steering wheel, unlike most of the competition? Meanwhile, nobody ever adds that the Escalade has power adjustable pedals available (unlike the competition), which addresses the same objective. Similarly, I've never seen mention of the fact that the Mercedes GL competitor still uses a joystick control for navigation, while the Escalade has the far superior touchscreen. Ever tried entering an address using the joystick interface? It sucks! But because Mercedes does it that way, it must be just as good or at least not worth mentioning. Were the situation reversed, do you really believe that difference would go unmentioned in your reviews? Did you ever point out in a GL or Q7 review that they don't have remote start, unlike the Caddy? No, but the Caddy leaves off the technological boon of auto-up windows or a key-integrated fob (whatever that's worth) and it's sure to make the list to show that Caddy is not keeping up with the imports. Which carries the implication that it's better to shop elsewhere.
Just to add one last point about negative GM bias, I feel that OnStar is a terrific differentiator that rarely gets its due in the press. Would it be so if Toyota had it and GM didn't? One can only speculate.
Sure, you guys are not as bad as Car and Driver. I just read their 4-cyl. Accord review, proclaiming it still the benchmark. After having rented the same vehicle on a recent trip, I have to believe they're either on the dole or drinking the Kool-Aid, because the disconnect from reality is, to me, startling.Thanks for listening, Karl, if you read this. I know now from your garage that you're no import-snob, but maybe you and your staff are not quite as even handed as you all might think. My appeal would be to ask yourselves this question before your write critiques, "if the badges were reversed, would I really be writing this comment about this car?" If the honest answer is no, that's bias.

Cont...
 
This in spite of the fact that Toyota's has been made famous because of the two most boring cars in history (camry&corolla)- jelly beans on wheels. As we climb the price ladder, NO car can be good unless it's the clone of the 3/5 series. Now, quality, ergonmics and reliability are completely thrown to the wind because BMWs ain't known for any of that. Either way, the press is biased, period.

excellent points Rf600! You took the words right out of my mouth in some respects.
 
It is 100% true that Edmunds glosses over faults of import vehicles on a regular basis on the grounds that those vehicles are reliable and have great resale value. Here's newsflash, most non European vehicles are reliable and well assembled these days and the resale value of the newer domestic products is actually very respectable. There are countless examples of domestic products being knocked for soft handling, boring styling, subpar plastics, etc. when competiting imports are given a free pass. A case in point would be the current Altima which Karl recently stated revolutionized the midsize segment in 2001. How is that logical? The Altima was significant because it was the most powerful Japanese sedan in that class and it was much bigger than the old car. Aside from that it was basically a Grand Prix with a Nissan badge. while the Altima was knocked for cheap plastics and torque steer the car was still endorsed by Edmunds and everyone else as a great value in the class when cars like the Grand Prix, Impala, Lacrosse etc. have been called mediocre in a million different ways. Is there any subjective reason that the Altima is better than any of GM's similar FWD sedans? None that I could think of but try reading a review of a GM midsizer and finding any information about their positive attributes as opposed to their supposedly cheap plastics and inferior build quality and GM's latest quarterly losses.
 
"I have even gone through the motions of test driving a few in the last few years, and frequently drive rentals. What have I discovered? That they are still crap! The only reason they still sell any vehicles is american jingoism, our big 3 wouldn't dream to try to sell any domestic vehicle elswhere in the world and expect to sell anything! "
 
The above statement is ridiculous. How could anyone make such a statement with vehicles like the SRX, Vette, Soltice, Impala, Mustang, 300C, STS, XLR, Aura, GMT900s, etc. on the market? Those vehicles are crap? I think that statement shows the mentality of many Edmunds readers and it's sad that Edmunds attitude towards domestics reinforces such ignorance.
 
"Like all empty promises the SUV hit the brick wall of reality, they were unsafe, had little passenger utility and wasted copious amounts of ever more expensive gas, in the mean time asians developed the modern car SUV/car crossover which fixed some of the SUV deficiencies. So now it stands that domestic manufacturers are back in the engineering curve at least 2 generations and are finding difficult if not impossible to catch up. "
 
More inaccuracies. Check the mileage on some of those import crossovers (Pilot, Toureg, Murano, Sorento, Sante Fe, CX-7 etc.) and see how they stack up against the Tahoe/Yukon. You may be surprised. Unfortunately, most people who make generalizations about the complete superiority of foreign engineering are not very familiar with the facts. I am not even an SUV owner but the facts speak for themselves. Most V6 midsize crossovers get 1-2mpg better mileage than GM's "archaic" V8 powered body on frame SUVs. again, you wont read this on Edmunds or anywhere else that tries to tell readers than ToyoHonda builds "green" while GM and Ford are trying to such every drop of oil out of the earth, but it is the truth. If Honda's engineering is so far ahead of GM/Ford why does the Pilot get 22mpg highway with 244hp? why is the Sequoia getting 18mpg with a 5 speed auto and 273hp and less weight than the GM utes?
 
If we had any type of objective journalism going on these issues would be discussed and people wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the engineering of domestic vehicles. Naturally such facts don't fit into the "The Big 3 need to emulate the Japanese" mentality you find here and elswewhere. God forbid we find out there are some things the Japanese could actually improve upon. Oh wait, none of that matters bec

Either way, the press is biased, period.
 
As are all buyers. We don't buy based on just numbers like fewest problems per 100 cars, 0-60, cargo volume, epa, resale. It's our biases that help us make decisions about cars and everything else.
 
To expect objective reporting about cars is as naive as expecting objectivity in a documentary or with your own decisions.
 
You can't remove bias from car reporting. Humans do the reporting. Humans are subjective creatures, Stop whining about bias!
 
BTW, Consumer Reports has bias...read their reviews and you will see a lean that they adopt. Safety? Ride harshness? Effectivness of HVAC? Ergonomics? Those are all subjective qualities!

Karl comments that because he has so many young people on his staff, they cant possibly have been indoctrinated with the supposed Edmunds bias.
 
Honestly, the kids walking in there probably have 10 times the pro-import sentiment of the Edmunds veterans, simply for becoming an auto enthusiast during the past decade or so.
 
I can't blame him for taking offense to DeLorenzo's accusations, but come on. Everybody is a little bit biased, to one company or another. Nothing is perfectly unslanted.
 
I can really only disagree with one point of the article -- Tundra most significant new vehicle? When the Toyota Tundra is the second-best selling vehicle in the single largest car market in the world, and receives a top-to-bottom makeover that may well determine the future of its entire parent company, then I will believe it is the most significant new vehicle. But right now, the Silverado and Sierra should have unconditionally taken that designation.

I'm delighted to see that Mr. DeLorenzo has embroiled Edmunds in the same debate which has dogged The Truth About Cars for the last two years (and counting): an alleged bias against so-called domestic automotive products.
  
While I can appreciate Sweet Pete's main point-- that he is the ultimate authority on matters automotive-- I'm going with Karl on this one.
  
Even though Karl's team is a relatively homogenous group with inbuilt prejudices for certain types of vehicular excellence, I have no doubt they chose the best products in their respective price and genre catagories without fear or favor.
  
Well precisely. Picking the "best of" cars, trucks, SUV, CUV's, pickups, etc. involves no risk whatsoever. No one other than autoextremists and model-specific partisans care about Captain Karl's final choices. Where Edmunds really falls down on the job is in it criticism-- not its accolades.
  
Edmunds simply can't/won't tell its readers that a vehicle should be avoided at all costs. Check it out. Think of the worst vehicle made today. Now click on the Edmunds review. If you read between the lines, they probably agree with you. But do they call a spade a spade? Nope.
 
Never mind subconscious prejudice. Let's talk about pandering to advertisers or, at best, not upsetting the apple cart (same thing).
  
The Truth About Cars shamed Edmunds into revealing car manufacturers' financial contributions to the website's reviews(though Edmunds still doesn't reveal the exact expenses involved). If Sweet Pete wants to improve Edmunds' editorial stance, he should join us is condemning the site for not condemning POS products, no matter which manufacturer is responsible.
  
Next week, The Truth About Cars will release its Ten Worst Automobiles Today (TWAT) awards. I challenge Edmunds to do the same.

Nice try Robert, but if you read my blog with any regularity you'd see I did the "bad cars" thing five months ago. http://66.160.188.111/karl/.ee91d17 Looks like challenge was met long before it was issued.

Point taken and I apologise for not spotting that earlier. That said...
 
A) You listed five cars, B) three of them were lame ducks (Toyota Echo?) and C) it's one thing to name names in your blog, it's another to reveal these cars in the main site.
 
Once again, it's half measures for Edmunds.

Well, as has been stated before, everyone has some bias, and they will be reflected in whatever they do in some fashion. This holds true for auto journalists as well. So when reading anything, you always have to keep that in mind.
That being the case, I guess Karl felt that there only five "really bad" cars out there. Again—his opinion, your mileage may differ...
As to the in-your-face, confrontational, Moses-from-the-mountaintop kind of journalism that some auto web sites seem to feel is necessary to get their point across, or to be heard, it can get old mighty fast. I read both TTC and Autoextremist and while I find a lot of what they say has merit (I've posted blogs over on Straightline about DeLorenzo's editorials in the past, not sure if I've posted any of Farago's), I do find their style sometimes a bit off-putting. They can claim to have a large audience and fan base, which I don't doubt; but I bet it would even be larger if they weren't so combative.
I don't think you have to write that way to be respected, to affect consumer-buying habits, or to influence industry decision makers. If I'm wrong here, then that doesn't say much about the writers, their audience, or the human race.

Man, what a bunch of whiny editors. So Mr. Farago, you're the reason why I have to read that stupid line at the end of each review about how the manufacturer provided the vehicle for the review? The first time I read that, I proclaimed, "Duh!" I figured it was some whiny consumer who didn't like one of Edmunds.com's reviews of his or her vehicle that was filing some type of lawsuit. Now I find out it's really a competing website that is probabably pissed off that they can't gain the readership, advertising money, and respect that Edmunds.com has built up over the past 11 years for its website, or the past 40 years for its printed publication.
 
I read the four reviews that are up on TTAC's home page (MKZ, ML63, Sky Red Line, Nitro). Unlike what is claimed TTAC's blanket statement about "Fair Disclosure" on the home page, none of these reviews mentioned how the vehicle was obtained for testing, and I highly doubt TTAC bought all of those vehicles for testing. That would be an awful amount of money, I think... I'll have to look up the prices of those vehicles here in Edmunds because half of those reviews lacked any type of pricing information.
 
What would be the point of "naming names" in any type of worst automobiles list, except to piss people off (the goal of shock journalism, which, thankfully, Edmunds does not adhere to)? Are there any vehicles on the market today that will not get you from point A to point B in a reliable manner? Fall apart everytime you get in them? Blow up when struck?
 
Naming names may also make you sound like you don't know what you are talking about. I should have the local Dodge dealerships read the paragraph about how the Caliber won't sell. They will, literally, be laughing all the way to the bank.

I'm glad Farago wrote in, because I wanted to say, thanks Karl for pointing out the failings of that "Truth about cars" site in your blog about 5 months ago. They are a bunch of bitter hit-men with low (no?) journalistic standards, and you pointed that out. And their tasteless writing style... please! (Farago's shameless mention of his "worst cars" feature is a witless acronym) is just odious. I'm surprised Farago has the nerve to chime in here, like he cares. (Maybe it's just the free press, proving Edmund's quality.)
 
At least you didn't delete his message post. He has deleted many opinionated but inoffensive posts on his site, simply to shape his editorial vision and to fashion a site where his viewpoints are championed. A very sad site indeed!

The fact that this falls under a category entitled "Domestic Manufacturers Problems/Challenges", the fact that such a category even exists, does say something. I won't read too much into it. I'll let the others fight about whether you are simply pointing out faults that are already there, and are so numerous that they deserve a category unto themselves, or whether you are looking for them out of bias.

And ignoring or downplaying faults in non-domestics out of preference (aka positive bias). An example, as pointed out somewhere above (maybe more than once too)- the European BMWs, Mercedes, etc. in large measure get a pass on quality and especially reliability, despite their high price tags.

Business Week has weighed in (Edmunds Most Wanted List A Blow To Detroit): "It may sound like spiking the punch, or bias. But I don't think so. First, the Big Three spend a huge amount of money with Edmunds, so it's not in Edmunds.com's interest to rig the deck. And as I went through the list one by one, I could not come up with many disputes." (David Kiley)
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2006/11/edmunds_most_wa.html

Others' opinions don't force me to change my own. Nor does anyone else agreeing or disagreeing with someone prove their opinion correct. We've already agreed that this stuff is opinion-based ('Edmunds' Most Wanted). All it proves is that others have similar opinions too. The fact that it's sparked this much discussion also shows that there are an equal number that have opposing viewpoints. ;-)

Agreed. In fact, I'm still looking for the road test and award system that isn't opinion based.
 
Tough to find...

Karl, you say that Mr. DeLorenzo has worked as a "paid consultant" to GM, Chrysler and Ford.
 
Actually he has never worked for Ford.
 
The Business Week article contains this sentence: "Bill Ford, whose company hasn't hired DeLorenzo as a consultant, takes a more sanguine attitude toward the autoextremist's rants: 'Sometimes I feel he is wrong, but other times Peter is dead-on,' he says."
 
I also don't recall him ever mentioning on his site that he worked for Ford (and I've read his site regularly almost from the beginning in 1999).
 
Having said that, I found his article to be ridiculous. Instead of stoning the messenger, he should use his consulting gigs to tell GM and Chrysler exactly WHY their vehicles often don't make the cut.
 
Does he really think that the Chevy Malibu, Pontiac G6 or Chrysler Sebring are on anyone's "most wanted" list?

As someone who works in the auto industry it is interesting to see what is in our garages. Many times it is not the present company that we work for. It just proves that you buy what you like. I have a million stories about that but one of my favorites is that my father in law still thinks that one of the best cars he ever owned was a Dodge Omni. AND he ordered from the factory a brand new Chevy Citation and claims that was almost as good as the Omni. It just goes to show that some people have opinions that make no sense to other people reguardless of what website or magizines they get published it. I mean really, who could love a Citation?

I had a friend who's dad owned TWO Citations, even after they had to replace the drivetrain in one because it failed in less than 15,000 miles. What OEMs wouldn't give for that kind of brand loyalty today!!