Nothing to add really. I pretty much agree with your assessments, except that I feel that (stated far too often anyway) that most have a definite bias towards certain vehicles or makes, so that you can generally predict the review content when seeing those makes and vehicles on the cover. Kinda like expecting that Motor Trend won't ever call a bad car bad, or a great car the best. ;-)
 
I especially like the search engine idea for Inside Line. This is one of my (okay, *the*) most accessed site, despite whatever ranting I may do about bias. You guys do a pretty good job!

--proclaim the winners "WINNERS!" and the losers "LOSERS!"--
 
I totaly agree. MT, on TV or in "dead tree" form, always has about 3 paragraphs of positiv things to say and about 2 sentences of negativity, folowed by another positive summery.

I read the cover paragraph and was all ready to sound off. Then I hit "Continue Reading" and found that you pretty much nailed my assessment of the existing dead-tree publications. About the only thing to add is with regards to IL. I think a good indexing system would really help. Perhaps that's what you meant by "an effective search function". I noticed that there used to be an "articles of the week" summary just under the flipper. It was a good idea and you were on the right track but it was poorly executed in my opinion.

By and large, I agree with Karl’s assessments. One note on Car and Driver – I mentioned last week how I’ve recently become disenchanted with its new layout and more importantly how the writing has been lacking its usual insight the past couple years. The comparison articles have been severely truncated and are lacking the old, hard-core sparkle. But the truth is, most US car mags no longer provide adequate feedback in their reviews. Compare old issues of every magazine listed in Karl’s list to more recent examples and the difference is obvious. I guess that is why I enjoy reading the long-term blogs on this site, as they get down to the details.
 
After purchasing the most recent copies of Autocar, Car and Evo, these UK magazines reaffirm their superiority over their US counterparts. When it comes to content (superb photos and biting reviews), they provide a ‘no compromise’ approach. It can be a tad too theatrical at times, but at least it’s entertaining. Too bad my wallet is still screaming at me though…these magazines are quite pricey.

Automobile - weak, never a big fan, they always seem to positive.
  
Motor trend - I used to like the old layout better, better before Angus.
  
Car and Driver - new format has yet to grow on me, my favorite of the bunch and the only one I still subscribe to.
  
Road and Track - the feature articles are great but I always thought they needed more in-depth reviews in every issue. Peter Egan is by far my favorite print editor - I look forward to reading his column every month.
  
Speed - A short lived spin off from Road and Track, I really like this one and wish it would have stuck around.
 
Basically, the internet is a much easier and more up to date resource than the magazines. And besides, I now look to Karl for all my automotive advice;)

i'm more of an online content guy. i agree with tiki though about the superiority of the UK buff mags over ours- save R&T. I too purchase Evo, AutoCar, Car and Top Gear. They're a bit more "harsh" in some occasions and very whimsical on others. All-in-all, very entertaining... Their photography content is top-notch.
 
Lastly, WE (InsideLine/Edmunds.com) are in DIRE need of a robust search engine... Seriously. I can't find anything! Hahaha!

A little note about Edmund's pro's and con's:
 
Pro's: Massive amount of vehicle info - best in the biz IMHO.
 
Con's: You can't/don't keep up with the automotive news the way sites like jalopnik.com do. Probably because your staff spends most of it's time on the Pro above.
 
As far as the buff books go, I'm down to Car and Driver, and the only reason I kept that was it was so cheap (something like $8-10 a year). When my subscription runs out in a couple years I don't know if I'll keep it. I certainly don't read it for the auto news, just photography/reviews and the occassional good article.

mirth: For the news, are you also checking out the IL News section
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/NewsLanding/
and the Straightline blog?
http://66.160.188.111/straightline/

I think MT started ranking vehicles in comparison tests a few years back to address criticism that they didnt pick winners. MT often says (and I agree) that which vehicle is best depends on your needs and I dont see a problem with that as long as they specify which vehicle they would pick. I do like that MT is packing more content into each issue.
 
C&D is getting very thin and their write ups in comparos are now just a few short paragraphs. We need more content not less.
 
R&T is the most fair of all the magazines but they dont do enough road tests and comparisons.

I love the videos edmunds offers. Normally, I look at a 8-page comparison and actually read the last paragraph. With edmunds, I can just watch a video for ~3 mins, and learn everything. Of course, there are people who prefer reading, and edmunds readily utilizes that feature as well. Great job on this website, I really like it.

From a writing standpoint I like car and driver hands down. I like that they know how to have fun. Two stories that come to mind are when the Kia Sportage first arrived on the scene in the 90's and they described the engine as lethargic as an old hound dog getting off a porch and then sounding as if a kindergarten class with a bunch of miracas had stampeded the old dog.... How do you come up with that??? and then there was the article about the absurdity of the Escalade EXT which ended up just being absolute rabbit trail with some photos of the escalade! Great stuff.
 
Having said that I like to get my auto news as fast as possible so my two websites are autoweek and Inside Line which seem to be the quickest with inside line definitely being more in depth. I read car and driver when they finally put the stories on the website. The best thing I like about Inside Line is there willingness to test mainstream models (like 4cyl family sedans) along with the exotics and their biased opinions (if they have them) are pretty much non-existent. I also like how inside line buys most of their long-termers and therefore fill you in on the dealership experiences, the actual transaction prices and what selling it was like (although they haven't purchased the last few recent additions, what's up with that?).
 
As for Motor Trend their writing just isn't what it used to be, and they used to always get the best performance numbers out of cars (in the late 90's) but don't seem to anymore. That and I feel like I should be sipping on a martini or something as the magazine has gone completely trendy. I think they are paying their layout guys way more than the writers/test drivers. Automobile and Road & Track have never really been on the radar for me since they like to do a ton of spreads on exotic cars which are cool from time to time but I'll never have the chance to own one or advise someone on a purchase of one!
 
my 2 cents
 
dp

Car & Driver
  
Pro's: Writers are pretty funny (even if I don't agree with their views) which keeps things entertaining. They provide detailed specs in individual reviews such as Cd, frontal area, brakes size, tire PSI, etc. I'm sure they'd love to condense that data area but it's managed to "stay the course" lol. Sorry !!
  
Cons: Extremely biased. The criteria for being the best changes depending on the type of car being evaluated. These cars win when:
BMW- sportiness, money/power no object
Toyota- no frills/commuter goodness
Honda- overall goodness where specs/features don't matter
Hyundai- best value.
They waste the first 2 paragraphs on stories and nostalgia that young people like me aren't familiar with.
  
Motor Trend: Bring back C. Van Tune. The magazine went down ever since he left. I did just re-up on two years this passed week because they've added content. I dropped my subscription 2 years ago.
  
Inside Line- I will negate the advantages of being on-line such as videos. Opinions based on test reviews only
  
Pros: They test plenty of vehicles. Stereo evaluations are an added bonus. Road test notes are a nice unexpected feature. The articles seem pretty lengthy (although that could just be the nature of a web page). They cover practical aspects of the cars without over emphasizing handling over all else.
  
Cons: The writers try to be too funny and sarcastic like C&D editors. Lack of editing- lots of inaccurate information regarding specs. Karl, I am a specs guru. Hire me part time to proof read before they go live. I'll work for cheap. Testing too many Porsches and expensive cars.

My critique, -- really of all the books and e-zines: Tested cars tend to be the highest-end of the model. The biggest engine, the most lux items, etc.
 
Secondly, horsepower trumps all. I mean, if you ask ME -- and you did ;-) --, an econobox that gets 22 mpg is a FAILURE as an econobox, not a triumph.
 
And in comparos, significant price differences don't pay out. Does someone really shop a $42,000 330i vs. a $32,000 TL?

Being a MT subscriber since the late 1950's, I am brainwashed as to the bland, ho hum reporting MT give us. "WHERE IS C. VAN TUNE WHEN YOU NEED HIM?" Man I miss that guy! My son in law is a pseudo car nut who subscribes to RT and CD. He gave me his latest issues, and boy, did my eyes light up. After reading these two, what a world of difference from MT. I was actually entertained, informed and yes, I got a few hearty laughs. Now I know what a "Italian Tune-up and Japanese Tune-Up" is, just from reading RT and CD. MT never informs a reader on things like this. Yes, Angus, its time that you move on. Your latest on "State of the Union" is the straw that broke the reader's back. Are you someone's brother in law?

One criticism I have of IL is that there are not enough comparisons here. Sure IL tests a lot of vehicles and gives us something new to read every week, but I would really like to see comparisons more than once every six months. Sometimes 3-4 years go by in between tests of a certain class of vehicles. C&D gives you a comparison in almost every issue as does MT.

That comment doesn't hold up. If you go to this page:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/DrivesIndex/Comparos
 
You can see all the comparison tests we've done for the past year plus. Just as an example, from December 2005 to December 2006 we did 17 comparison tests. That almost 1.5 a month -- which would equate to more than any print book. Now throw in road tests, news, columns, features, blog entries, etc.
 
Basically, it's not even close.

Different magazines appeal to different people. I think you did an accurate job of describing the attributes of each publication. I think all could benefit by maintaining a bigger archive of past roadtest, video coverage, etc. I also feel that with the way vehicles are compared with no standard rubric for basis; which features or specs contribute to making the perfect car. It seems as if the comparison field is never level.

I think I was talking about comparisons with 4 or 5 vehicles. I see that IL has done quite a few two vehicle comparos but I like the larger ones better. Two vehicle comparos are pretty rare in other publications as far as I can tell but perhaps some people like them. Honestly I didn't read a lot of those comparos because they didnt interest me too much so that is probably why I didn't realize how many have been posted. I do remember the sport compact compario being extremely short and not unlike the new C&D comparos that give you little detail on each vehicle. I didnt mean to suggest IL was somehow lacking content compared to monthly mags or suggest that montly mags are more relevant. Common sense dictates that a site updated daily is going to be able to offer more that a monthly mag. I dont see the existence of online mags as proof that we are better off without print mags. The more the merrier as far as the readers are concerned.
 
Speaking of comparos I would like to see a FWD luxury sedan comparo between the Passat, TL and Maxima. I have been wondering why no one has done one like this. I would also like to see an Avalon vs Lucerne CXL comparison. Perhaps the Taurus/Montego could be in there as well once they get the new engine. I also want to see a Camry V6 vs Aura XR vs Altima SE comparion.

I'd like to see a wagon comparo... around 25k to get in the door. Subaru Legacy Non-GT, Mazda 6.... uhhhh... Passat maybe? There aren't actually that many wagons in that price range. well whatever... it would be cool.

Isn't there not a Subaru Legacy wagon anymore?
 
~alpha

This is kind of a timely article for me, because C&D's office's just harrassed me a week or so ago to renew my subscription (just got my last issue) and I turned it down. Why? Well it's a combination of most of the reason's listed above. I initially started with them because of the reputation and I'd enjoyed the few issues I'd read all the way through. Now though, the spirit that I enjoyed so thoroughly has dwindled. The writing on actual cars has gotten shorter and shorter (their recent subcompact comparison had maybe 150 words on each entry, I want five or six times as much), their clear and evident biases are starting to annoy (especially price... sometimes it's absolutely ridiculous that two cars would be examiend together, yet the more expensive car nearly always wins, like the G35/BMW comparison this past issue), and the extraordinary focus on super-expensive cars (which I understand but it's starting to annoy me that I will likely never buy a Porsche, not their fault but still).
  
I've always loved their playfulness, the photography, and their 10Best as a general idea (rarely agree with all the results), but it's just not enough anymore. The killing blow came when they did a compact comparison (maybe two or three months ago) and picked the Volkswagon Golf over the Mazda3. I've driven both (being in the exact market for that size of vehicle), and there is no comparison in terms of things that C&D used to emphasize. The 3 is simply outstanding when it comes to fun, looks, and working with the driver. It also got better fuel economy, delivered far superior performance results, and if the interior is of slightly lower quality, it's not by much. I'd kind of been waiting for that review for months, since they kept hinting they would perform such a comparo, and then I was dashed when they picked an inferior vehicle because of typical Euro-cachet. Just personally, I can no longer take their word for anything, after a blunder that big. It's really just indicative of the softness and predictability their staff has kind of undergone as of late. From now on it's InsideLine alone for me, as far as critical journalism goes.

I am not sure how much it matters. But reading this article, has raised my respect for you quite a few notches.
 
Its always good to see some honest journalism. I would still remain a fan of "Car and Driver" and Insideline. Please note, I have put Car and Driver first :) .