2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS: The Textcast

So ladies, when's the wedding?

Wow, this article has everything! Drowning corpses, words I have to look up (polemic: A person inclined to controversy, argument or refutation) and calling the Camaro out for what it is: a flash in the pan.

^^Not at Grandma's house, apparently.

-JS

My one close up encounter with the Camaro was at the Chicago Auto Show in Feb. I was unimpressed. The fake shark gills look like something from a Hot Wheels car, and at least on the example on display, the paint quality would have embarrassed Earl Scheib (and I speak from experience having had them paint my '76 Fiesta back in the mid '80's).

Looks wise, I think the Mustang and Challenger are far better looking than the Camaro. Although I do like he Camaro better than the GT-R, which is too '80's Starion sharp for my taste.

Whose black Camaro is that? It looks amazing! Though I'd still prefer one in red.

I do wish the SS had more aggressive gear ratios. I assume it'll be an option in later model years since the Z28 project is back on track.

I disagree with Magrath. The car appeals to a large market...just as large as the Mustang's.

1st year models always have minor issues or simply less upgrade options available. The 2005 Mustang faced the same issues, but a the next model years offered many variations and customizing options. The 2008 Challenger was only offered with an automatic transmission and it wasn't until the following year that the car had R/T & SE models available. It'll be the same with the Camaro.

2 years from now the Camaro will be a more refined car.

If by "old person" looks you mean it doesn't look like a Camaccord or a 370Z that a pimply 16 year old used his trust fund to tack mismatched "body kits" onto, then count me in for "old person" styling. The Camaro's style works because it looks good, just like it did to start with in 1967.

For all the praise for the Mustang GT, it is never acknowledged that what everyone really loves is the Track Pack. Spend the same money as the track pack upgrade for stiffer sway bars, 3.73 gears, and properly sized, matched width wheel/tire combos and the Camaro will improve just the same as the Mustang. Clearly GM set up the Camaro to be more efficient and far more benign. (Lets face it, the average "driver" is an idiot.) Take away the idiot proofing for very little cost (and removing skip shift for darn near no cost) and it drives like you expect it.

And stop with all this nonsense about not being able to see out of it or hold the wheel. I'm a small guy, but I have no problem seeing out and the wheel is perfectly comfortable.

@stovt001,

Can you see the front corners of the car? Do you have any idea where they are when you're driving? I'm 6'1" and my hair's brushing the roof, and I have no idea where those corners are.

-JS

stovt001 said:

"For all the praise for the Mustang GT, it is never acknowledged that what everyone really loves is the Track Pack."

I agree. Everyone thought of the Mustang GT as an average muscle car until Ford introduced the Track Packs, limited slip diff and 3.73 gears. Take away all of that and you end up with a car that handles poorly and is easily unsettled when hitting the slightest road imperfections at high speed.

"And stop with all this nonsense about not being able to see out of it or hold the wheel. I'm a small guy, but I have no problem seeing out and the wheel is perfectly comfortable."

I also agree. I'm 5'10 and my girl friend is 5'2" and both of us didn't complain about visibility when driving this car. The C-Pilar is large, but there's a small window (similar to the GTR) that allows you to see out the sides when backing up or changing lanes. And the steering wheel does have grooves at 10 & 2 to allow you to grip the steering wheel properly and it's not difficult to hold when turning the wheel. It's not the most comfortable steering wheel in the world, but it's hardly anything to complain about.

I wouldn't call the Camaro old guy styling. I'd call it 6 year old styling. It looks like crap some little kid drew with crayons. There is no class in the design at all. Add in the fact that it's gigantic and you have an enormous gaudy mess.

Sadlier said:

"Can you see the front corners of the car? Do you have any idea where they are when you're driving? I'm 6'1" and my hair's brushing the roof, and I have no idea where those corners are."

I know you addressed stovt001 so I'm sorry to intrude. My 2nd job is working as a shift manager at a hotel and last week I had to fill-in for an absent valet attendant. I had to park & suffle around a Victory Red Camaro SS through our garage and had no trouble placing the car in any spot, whether parallel, back-in, swerve in or next to walls/pillars.

I was a huge fan of the Camaro all through development (a long time), right up until I sat in one.

I'm not big on materials, so I really didn't take notice of those.

...what I did take notice of was the fact that you can't see out of it and the shape of the wheel and shifter were ridiculous.

To me, that's unacceptable in a car that I'm going to be driving in any spirited way.

@DCuerpoJr,

I believe you, but here's our track driver's comment from the slalom test:

"It's as if I'm slaloming with blinders on. It's very very difficult to determine where the front tires are..."

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2009/10/2010-chevy-camaro-ss-track-tested.html

Personally I think it's hard to park this thing too, but I'm not good at parking, so take that with a grain of salt. In spirited driving, though, the visibility is certainly an issue.

Maybe visibility does have to do with height. Honestly, I can understand how people of different height will have different perspectives. Maybe GM realized the limited headroom and just designed the whole thing for shorter people. I'm 5'8, for the record. My 5'10 wife only remarked it felt larger than a Cobalt (fascinating observation of the day right there) but otherwise had no problem with the visibility.

Completely off topic, I saw a Cyber Grey Metallic Camaro SS today, the first time I've seen that car in that color in person, and while I loved it in pictures, in real life it did nothing for me. I also saw an Imperial Blue model and sorta liked it. I conclude the Camaro must be painted in an actual color, the brighter the better. That is all.

I don't know if I ever had any respect for Magrath but if I did I've lost it all. Wow, he sounds like a real tool in that exchange. He can't come up with ANYTHING positive about the car? fortunately the buying public and most of the automotive press have more sense than he does. For once Sadlier is making sense. In effect I think Camaro haters like Magrath are genuinely bothered by the fact that in spite of all the predictions of this car being played out due to being shown in 2006 its a smash hit. They can't stand its success and I hope it continues to sell well if it annoys the heck out of someone as bitter and illogical as Magrath. Anyone who said they would rather drown than own a Camaro shouldn't even be evaluating cars for a living. This car is not supposed to be an all out sports car. Sadlier explained its purpose very accurately. Its time to get over this notion that the Camaro is crap because its not as light and nimble as a Porsche.

"No they aren't. And like the Solstice, this Camaro isn't a long-burn car. It's high-heat and lots of fuel, but not good enough for a sustained burn. Seriously, who does this car appeal to that isn't already under the GM umbrella? The Camaro will only sell to people who REALLY WANT a Camaro."

Out of all the stupid things he said this passage takes the cake. The Camaro has been outselling the mustang for the last 3-4 months. Considering the old Camaro was cancelled due to lack of appeal the probability that this car is selling ONLY to Camaro enthusiasts is slim to none. Considering the Mustang never left and is very competent its hard to believe that its getting outsold by the Chevy simply because tens of thousands of stupid Camaro owners were dying to buy any RWD coupe with a Chevy badge and they paid no attention to the supposed half assed execution of the 2010 Camaro. The more likely scenario is that people of all kinds like its price, style and power. For the record the Solstice NEVER sold in high numbers like the Camaro and was always intended to be a niche car. Also someone should tell Mike that the Solstice was only given the axe after Pontiac was cancelled. 2 seat convertibles are not volume sellers and the Soltice/Sky outsold the Miata.

"I wouldn't call the Camaro old guy styling. I'd call it 6 year old styling. It looks like crap some little kid drew with crayons. There is no class in the design at all. Add in the fact that it's gigantic and you have an enormous gaudy mess."

exactly, thats why no one is buying it so far. What coupes in this price range look better to you? Civic Si? Solara?

I'm glad STOV1 mentioned the track pack on the Mustang. No magazine has tested the Gt without it and when the first instrumented tests of the car came out the track pack wasn't even priced, much less available. We all know 90% of Mustangs will not have this package and thus will not be able to outhandle the Camaro.

Its probably true that you can't really see the corners of this car when driving fast on narrow mountain roads. Its probably true that most owners aren't really in such a situation that often and thus don't give a damn. As long as you can see well enough to change lanes and not hit anyone they are fine. I have perused the comments made by Camaro owners on edmunds.com- visibility is hardly a deal breaking issue to the owners who have posted. Many don't even mention it. They do mention styling, performance, brakes and value. Imagine that. I drive a sedan and I can't tell where the corners are- you get used to it.

"Anyone who said they would rather drown than own a Camaro shouldn't even be evaluating cars for a living. " -- 1487

Correct, they shouldn't. Good thing what I said was that I'd drown my grandmother for a 2010 GT500.

The two ideas are similar, but yet very, very different.

-mm

Let's not pretend that the Camaro's sales are so high for any reason other then the fact that the hype machine was running for 3 years. Once the novelty has worn off, it will sell in similar numbers to the Mustang.

Its a great car that I would love to own, but its sales are inflated right now and thats due to the hype machine more then anything.

The Camaro is absolutely selling on pent up demand. Watch it nose dive in a year or two, like they always do.

Its funny that GT-R has more presence while actually having a functional purpose. And is it a glitch or does the Camaro have a lip spoiler? If so, LOL! As if a two ton porker needed anything else to keep its rear end on the ground.

Ah, as usual, stov and company are around to tell us the Camaro is wrongly accused of everything, in fact so much so that they have to bring in another car and diss it to prove their point.

"If by "old person" looks you mean it doesn't look like a Camaccord or a 370Z that a pimply 16 year old used his trust fund to tack mismatched "body kits" onto, then count me in for "old person" styling."

Just about every critic has praised the Z for sharp styling and functionality in terms of seating position and such, (even the British and they are actually worth listening to). Body kit styling doesn't give a car a drag of .29. Surprise! Thats actual engineering.

And the pimply 16 year olds are the ones who are convincing their dads to buy them a Camaro right after they step out of Cinemas after watching Transformers for the fifth time.

Its absolutely hilarious when the Z gets so much postive review and compares so favourably against the Caymen, Z4 and others, only to be have some Camaro fan tell everyone a pony car is a better deal and what not.(The one about some guy saying the Mustang is the better sporstcar because it has a V8 still takes the cake though)

But please, don't stop. Tell us how great is a car that came out the way it is because the designer was bored and shaped this car from 44 galleon drums (that might explain the weight) using nought but a claw hammer.

And all this!(gasp), the superbly executed interior, the brilliant seating, excellent vision, not to mention the hood scope which adds like 20whp, was done in only a matter of four years!

Mmmm... Powersliding GT500...

1487:"I don't know if I ever had any respect for Magrath but if I did I've lost it all. Wow, he sounds like a real tool in that exchange."

Oh no! Magrath lost 1487's respect! How will he ever get on with his life?!

"exactly, thats why no one is buying it so far. What coupes in this price range look better to you? Civic Si? Solara?"

All of them- Mustang, Challenger, Z, Genesis Coupe, RX8. Can't even think of one that looks worse. As for why it is selling looking the way it does, rednecks aren't exactly known for taste. (that is a joke. I know you will take it seriously if I don't point that out.)

Your reasoning that Magrath want it to fail and can't stand it's success is really strange. What reason would anyone have to think that way? The Camaro only bothers me because it should have been way better than it is. This car does not live up to its potential. Chevy started with the best powertrain of any of it's competitors and it should be embarrassing the Mustang and its weak v8. Instead it's merely competitive. What happens when the Coyote comes out? I don't care how many people buy the Camaro, that doesn't change how flawed it is imo.

Chevy did a hell of a job making this car into a joke. The exterior, interior, weight, blind spots, steering wheel. It is quite a feat to spoil a rwd sports coupe with an LS3... Congratulations???

"Let's not pretend that the Camaro's sales are so high for any reason other then the fact that the hype machine was running for 3 years."

Glad you got that all figured out doug. Good thing you know why every single Camaro owner made that decision.

"Absolutely not. Objectively, the Camaro's better. Subjectively, I would rather drown myself than own one. "

Who said that? I thought Mike did. Maybe I was wrong.

Isellcars:

Stop trying to get famous on my coattails. Come up with something to say about CARS.

Thanks.

Compliance:

I don't understand your interpretation of good styling. Most auto journalists and thousands of buyers disagree with you. So do I. The Genesis is a generic coupe shape. Its attractive but totally unoriginal. The Mustang looks OK but barely looks different from the last gen model. RX-8 is a nonfactor. The Z is a 2 seater that looks pretty good but is barely distinguishable from the old car. Amongst coupes with backseats in this price range NOTHING looks better. Nothing.

You are right though, this car is a failure because it has blind spots. In fact, its the first coupe in history with blind spots. I heard the Z has excellent visibility out the back. Who on earth would ever thing a coupe with a sporty profile would have less than stellar visibility? Its SHOCKING.

The Mustang is light because its on an old platform. As I have pointed out numerous times- OTHER V8 POWERED COUPES HAVE WEIGHTS SIMILAR TO CAMARO. Anyone who is shocked that the Mustang is almost as fast as the Camaro lacks a basic understanding of physics. The last gen camaro weighed about 3500lbs because it was on a dated platform and lacked the rigidity and features of a modern car. You keep comparing Mustang to the camaro but fail to mention a Mustang can keep up with a $60k S5 or $60k E550 coupe. Why? Its LIGHTER. Are now going to suggest the S5 and E550 are half assed because they can't outrun a Mustang? Shouldn't they be "embarrassing" the Mustang for twice the money?

How many coupes are out there that are better than the Camaro and have a $24k starting price? It should be way better? Thats a stretch. It has good looks and 304hp standard as well as great brakes, a tolerable ride and decent handling for less than 25 grand and you say it should be much better. That is ridiculous. And please don't talk about the interior since the Genesis has just as much plastic inside.

"And the pimply 16 year olds are the ones who are convincing their dads to buy them a Camaro right after they step out of Cinemas after watching Transformers for the fifth time.
Its absolutely hilarious when the Z gets so much postive review and compares so favourably against the Caymen, Z4 and others, only to be have some Camaro fan tell everyone a pony car is a better deal and what not.(The one about some guy saying the Mustang is the better sporstcar because it has a V8 still takes the cake though)"

You aren't too bright as evidenced every time you bless us with a post here.

1. camaro isn't a raw sports car like the Z. I challenge you to name ONE Camaro in history that was a true sports car like the Z. Just one.

2. How many 16 year olds get a new car with a sticker price of $24-$37k? Not many. Camaros are being purchased by working adults who like the car.

3. No one buys the Z. Don't get mad at me- its a fact. They don't even sell 1000 a month.

4. Aside from Macgrath and his sympathizers most people think the camaro is attractive. Since you probably think the Civic Si is an example of a sexy coupe you wouldn't understand.

"The Camaro is absolutely selling on pent up demand. Watch it nose dive in a year or two, like they always do."

the last gen camaro NEVER outsold the Mustang consistently. That's one reason it got cancelled. What do you mean "like they always do"? This car has appeal beyond the traditional muscle car/pony car fan. Get over it. Sales may decrease, but that doesn't mean it wont be outselling Mustang. Remember the Z28 and convertible are on the way. Mustang has 3 versions and is being outsold by the Chevy. There is also speculation that Chevy may be working on a track package like the Mustang has. This is only the first version of this car- to think GM is going to sit around and not tweak it to keep it competitive is foolish.

@1487,
_____

"Absolutely not. Objectively, the Camaro's better. Subjectively, I would rather drown myself than own one. "

Who said that? I thought Mike did. Maybe I was wrong.
_____

He did, but quickly conceded that he was "lying a little." The part he instructs you to believe is that he would rather drown his dead grandmother.

Nuance: it's what makes a Textcast a Textcast.

-JS

"Are now going to suggest the S5 and E550 are half assed because they can't outrun a Mustang?"

Those cars aren't competing with the Mustang and Camaro. They are loaded down with things like an interior I'd want to sit in. If the Mustang has a significant advantage because it is lighter, then the logical conclusion is that the Camaro is too heavy. I like your excuse that it's heavy because the platform is so "modern".

PS The "irrelevant" RX8 is better than the Camaro in every way but power. It weighs 3000 lbs, is extremely rigid, and has a telepathic connection to the driver. It drives how a sports car is supposed to. read: Nothing like a Camaro.

@bankerdanny
watch the Starion jabs, I still own the '87 Starion I had in high school, been in storage for 10 years. Can't beat a turbo 4 with rear wheel drive, I was drifting before it was cool.

This new web page blows. The dang thing has thrown my last 2 attempts away without posting...

Both of you (actually, most product reviewers) really need to get over your preconceptions and objectively review the products. For instance, Sadlier stated: "It's not like a Solstice or a Prowler where it looks interesting and drives like crap", despite edmunds' own review of the prowler stating 'As bizarre as it felt to drive the car fast around a racetrack, it was even more mind-boggling to watch the action from pit row. As one editor stated after witnessing several Prowler hot laps, "How is it doing that? Man, that's just wrong."' And Magrath is going on about "Pathetic old-guy looks" again I see. Get over yourself! All that tells me is that you are overly concerned about looking old (which makes me wonder how old you actually are...)! Stop writing about preconceptions and stereotypes and actually judge the dang cars!

(And if this post gets dumped again, I'm outta edmunds...)

^I don't think your Prowler quote is representative of the overall opinion expressed in that article.

Also, a Solstice GXP might be quick around the Streets of Willow too. Still drives like crap.

-JS

"Amongst coupes with backseats in this price range NOTHING looks better. Nothing."

Careful everyone. When 1487 talks like that, we all know its fact.

You made four points, none of them contradicting or proving what I said was wrong. Iam an understanding person though. I can only assume you are GM worker paid to defend its crap or someone special with access to internet and plenty of free time in your hand. I believe it's the latter. I'll try to humour you though.

"1. camaro isn't a raw sports car like the Z. I challenge you to name ONE Camaro in history that was a true sports car like the Z. Just one."

So its not a true sports car, it not a GT and I believe pony car means a car with decent performance and reasonable price. What is its function? Only one I can think of is to cater for the Transformer crowd.

"2. How many 16 year olds get a new car with a sticker price of $24-$37k? Not many. Camaros are being purchased by working adults who like the car."

I hope you can understand what others write. You seem to have comprehension issues. I said they convince their dads to buy them one, remember? No? Its okay.

"3. No one buys the Z. Don't get mad at me- its a fact. They don't even sell 1000 a month."

So a car not selling automatically makes it what? A bad car? By your theory, it is not a direct competitor but you find it okay to compare sales?

You know what? I can live with the knowledge the the Z doesn't sell as well but is an actual sportscar rather than an overweight junk which caters for people who think doing burnouts make them good drivers and has a fanbase created by a kids movie.

"4. Aside from Macgrath and his sympathizers most people think the camaro is attractive. Since you probably think the Civic Si is an example of a sexy coupe you wouldn't understand."

Actually I believe I once called him Boxer Moron, for which I do apologise. Suffice to say though, Iam not a fan of his. And a Civic Si? Truth be told, Iam not a fan of the design but I would take a Civic with an actual engine and which probably handles better than this car.

"The Z is a 2 seater that looks pretty good but is barely distinguishable from the old car."

The new Z is better in every way, including looks and just about everyone says that, except you of course. I hope you'll forgive me not joining in your line of thinking.

I did notice something hilarious about a couple of the Camaro reviews. For example, the Genesis 3.6 beat it in every performance contest in a review by C@D (Iam aware that the Genesis lost because it had a harsh ride). And then the 3.6 got beat by a Mazda Speed3 on IL. So does that mean a front drive car is better than a "manly" car with its awesome design that gives people like you instant orgasms?

Food for thought......

I'm surprised at the hostile opinions of the Edmunds drivers towards the Camaro. It seems like the Transformers promotion is a good excuse for creative writing to slam the Camaro but this bodystyle has been in the public eye for years. It's what the public wanted.

I think it's a great design and agree with one person who said this is just the initial offering of this bodystyle. The Z28, convertible, different suspension options... all these things are possible.
The goodness of the foundation will carry this as something GM can be proud of. The SS is a great opener and they priced it perfectly.

Auto critics have notoriously short memories. Next year, Chevy will tweek a few things and Magrath will be saying how great it is!

I'd just like to say that I found the textcast enjoyable. Objectivity is overrated, and I'd be willing to give up some of that up to hear actual opinions of editors. Discounting subjective observations is a slippery slope that leads to characterless writing and roadtests that are simply a list of numbers. Josh and Mike: keep it up.

"He did, but quickly conceded that he was "lying a little." The part he instructs you to believe is that he would rather drown his dead grandmother."

Like I said, he claimed her rather drown himself than own one of these. I understand hyperbole but his point is he would never own one because he dislikes so much about the car.

"^I don't think your Prowler quote is representative of the overall opinion expressed in that article.
Also, a Solstice GXP might be quick around the Streets of Willow too. Still drives like crap."

actually most of the automotive press thought the Solstice drove just fine. The first model was underpowered based its curb weight and the GXP solved the power problem. With the exception of the Camaro your opinions on American cars are always out of line with what other experts say. I'm sure you will now bombard me with quotes from IL reviews illustrating how the Solstice was a complete piece of garbage. BTW, is there any non BMW vehicle that doesn't "drive like crap" in your opinion?

ACE:

I didn't bother to read your post. Stop trying to establish a name for yourself by following me around and responding to all my posts. Do your own thing. Come up with an intelligent contribution. Read more about cars and learn things like the Mustang has an OHC engine.

"Objectivity is overrated, and I'd be willing to give up some of that up to hear actual opinions of editors."

Is intelligence also overrated? How about consistency? How about being honest about the mission of a car and how well that car achieves that particular mission? Next Mike will tell us how the Camaro sucks as a family vacation car and blame it on Chevy's lack of engineering capability.

Compliance:

Shockingly you ignored all the information I provided for you in my earlier post. Compared to other V8 sports coupes not called Mustang the Camaro is not too heavy. Don't even bring up the RX-8. It lacks a V8 and has a tiny rotary engine that weighs much less than the Chevy's engine. It's also a gas guzzler and a poor seller. It looks pretty good but its a compromised car.

The Mustang is built on a cheaper version of the platform that supported the 2000 Lincoln LS and S type. That platform is obviously not as rigid as the newer platforms supporting V8 cars like the E550 and Camaro and thus it weighs less. If the Mustang is ever put on a new chassis the weight will go up. The old Camaro was lighter than the current Mustang but I hardly think anyone would call it a better engineered car just because it was lighter.

"Those cars aren't competing with the Mustang and Camaro. They are loaded down with things like an interior I'd want to sit in."

Really, better interiors for an extra $30k? Who would've thunk it? Also, I never said they were competitors, I said they have similar curb weights to the Camaro so your suggestion that the Camaro was "too heavy" is baseless. Both GErman cars are actually shorter and narrower than the Camaro and yet weigh about 3800-3900lbs.

uncanny_man:

How contradictory is it to knock the Camaro for appealing to Transformers watching 16 year olds in one sentence and then to say it has "pathetic old guy styling" in another within the same conversation? He is trying so hard to bash the car he can't even keep his logic straight. He hates it because teenagers got hoooked on it after watching a mediocre movie and he also hates it because the styling only appeals to old guys as opposed to "cool" young guys like himself. Pretty much everyone I've asked about the car likes it and most people I know are upper 20s to low 30s. Of course, if you don't talk to people and canvass opinions and base everything on your biased sentiments you tend to lose touch with reality.

"Glad you got that all figured out doug. Good thing you know why every single Camaro owner made that decision. "

Yah, just like you the sales are high for some other reason. Try hard not be such a hypocrite.

whoops, spelling:

just like you assume the sales are high for some other reason.

The numbers will come down to something more reasonable. I'm not bashing the vehicle, just stating that the current numbers are inflated, just like when most hyped new cars come onto the market. When the public was upset at the cancellation of such a history vehicle and a new model comes out with such great looks and hype, no wonder its selling well. Its still going to slow down and become more sustainable.

Its nothing mindblowing - 1487: step back and think about it instead of focusing a wisecrack at me.

Also, the new 1487 comment about saying people are following on his coat tales to become famous on edmunds is hilarious. What an ego - as if this wasn't proven by having nearly 20% of the posts on this thread, lol.

"Next Mike will tell us how the Camaro sucks as a family vacation car and blame it on Chevy's lack of engineering capability."

Well, now that you mention it: the trunk opening is ridiculously small.

@1487,

"actually most of the automotive press thought the Solstice drove just fine."

If so, most of the automotive press has got some profound car comprehension issues.

"BTW, is there any non BMW vehicle that doesn't 'drive like crap' in your opinion?"

On the off chance that this is a serious question, try the following website: www.google.com.

And please give me back the 19 seconds I wasted reading your comment.

-JS

@SadButTrue:
More likely, different members of the automotive press have different preconceptions by which they compare and judge how a car should handle or drive. It would be nice if reviewers were up front about their preferences and histories (like stating if they grew up on japanese or domestic cars and what their daily driver is and such) at the start of a review if they can't put them aside to review objectively. I'm not picking on any one in particular, I'm just saying that it would be nice!

Sadlier & Magrath:

Guys, I love these. The give and take, the humorous hyperbole, the raw emtotion about cars. Awesome stuff. Funny and thought provoking. Please keep doing these. Thanks.

"If so, most of the automotive press has got some profound car comprehension issues."

No actually their anti GM bias is probably just a little less acute than yours. I mean surely your premise that a RWD coupe with 50/50 weight distribution, manula tranny, great breakes and turbo engine drives like crap makes PLENTY of sense. You are good at the smart aleck respones- not so good at actually being consistent or logical in your negativity towards all things not up to your German car tastes.

"On the off chance that this is a serious question, try the following website: www.google.com.

And please give me back the 19 seconds I wasted reading your comment."

Not sure how that answered the question. Is that a "no"?

uncanny_man:

What you said makes sense, but it aint happening. One thing I have learned if you want to get an auto writer flustered just say "biased". Most of these guys grew up in the era when Americans were just abandoning American cars. Their parents probably owned one back in the day and it broke down a few times and they switched to Honda or Toyota and never looked back. Thus people like Sadlier have been raised with the idea that everything from Detroit is a product of poor planing and backwards thinking. Conversely, everything from Germany is flawless and well engineered because Germans are more precise and more intelligent than engineers here. Japanese cars are somewhere in the middle. They are really smart and do things right but aren't as passionate about auto styling or engineering as the Germans but they sure as hell are much smarter than Americans and thus design superior cars. BAsically the opinions of these Gen Y reviewers are sculpted by those impressions and personal histories.

"Also, the new 1487 comment about saying people are following on his coat tales to become famous on edmunds is hilarious. What an ego - as if this wasn't proven by having nearly 20% of the posts on this thread, lol."

Not ego, just fact. Read the comments of these people for yourself. They don't actually know anyting about cars. they just comment on my comments. Come to your own conclusions. Its pathetic.

Sadbuttrue:

one other question: do you ever talk to your colleagues from other magazines/sites at press events? Do you actually go to those events? Anyone who reads your comments can sense your arrogance and I notice you have a habit of belittling professional opinions that totally contradict yours. Considering many auto journalists have far more experience than you do and many of them have taken plenty of shots at Detroit I don't buy your "their being soft out of patriotic duty" line of thinking. In fact, the Camaro and G8 (same platform) seem to be the only American vehicles that are widely praised that you don't seem to have a problem with.

Dang it, can someone throw me a towel? I think I just waded through a pissing match.

Re: pissing match, I will say that 1487's comments have the appearance of what is sometimes referred to in media studies as "flak," i.e., knowingly false accusations hurled at those with opposing views so as to harass them and divert their attention from legitimate concerns.

But I doubt it's actually flak that we're dealing with here; more likely, it's a combination of a poor memory and a genuine patriotic loyalty to American automakers.

I say "poor memory" because it's the only explanation I've got (other than the flak hypothesis) for a question like "is there any non BMW vehicle that doesn't 'drive like crap' in your opinion?" We all know 1487 is an avid reader of this blog, so he must have just forgotten about the praise I've given to various American long-termers not named Camaro. (Perhaps he also forgot about my praise for the Corvette Z06 in this very post.)

And the patriotic loyalty would explain his humorless and mistake-riddled attacks on those who find certain American cars lacking. When one is that dedicated to a cause, those who contradict his views will always be "biased," regardless of what the facts say.

This blind patriotism may also explain why Google was not employed, as such patriots have an allergy to inconvenient truths. Before making blanket accusations, a reasonable person would be inclined to do some research, which in this case would entail examining my various Edmunds and Weekly Top 3 reviews of American-branded vehicles, a step that 1487 plainly did not take.

I would also note that there is no universal law stating that at least some of a nation's cars *must* not drive like crap. As it happens, I have found numerous American cars to drive quite well, but there was nothing inevitable about that. At the moment, for example, there is general agreement that all Chinese cars drive like crap. Journalists who hold this view are not therefore guilty of an anti-Chinese bias.

-JS

+1 @greenpony
and
+1 @crowb

I also like these text-casts. While I may not agree with some of the opinions or arguments, it's still entertaining to read and comment on.

"Well, now that you mention it: the trunk opening is ridiculously small."

Well sports coupes are known for large trunk openings- good point. It has trouble pulling a trailer too.

sadbutrue:

One problem with your hypothesis- I don't twist facts to make my points. You lack a basic understanding of what "bias" even means. Thats surprising because I thought you majored in English or something. If I was biased I would be contorting facts in order to defend the indefensible. I don't do that. I merely point out that many of your domestic bashing opinions are outside of the mainstream and I ask you to explain how your "expert" opinion can be so far off what others in your business say about the same cars. I noted you like the G8 and Camaro- glad to hear it.

I wouldn't accuse anyone of getting facts wrong when you were the one telling me that the SRX was slower through the slalom than its European competitors when your own site says otherwise. BTW, I have actually driven it now so I know for certain that your review was based on your personal anger towards Cadillac for putting the SRX on a new platform as opposed to the vehicle itself.

Since you skip my posts often to save "19 seconds" of your valuable time you likely missed it when I said (repeatedly) that the S5, G37 and 3 series are amongst my favorite cars. No "patriotism" here, but I am a fan of consistency and accuracy which is why you and I will never see eye to eye. Whenever people have trouble dicrediting what I say they are quick to play the "domestic" card. Its a good way to distract people from the fact that you aren't making much sense.

I really don't know all that you do for Edmunds so the "google me" comment made no sense to me. Why not just tell me what you wanted me to look up? Trying to correlate my stance on cars to some sort of refusal to use google is nonsensical. You are stretching like a gymnast at this point.

There is nothing wrong with saying an American car drives like crap if there is some basis for it. In this case the stats on the Solstice GXP plus the opinions of others who are paid to do what you do make your opinion sound like "crap". BTW- what are the specific reasons the GXP was such a terrible handling car? I notice you are big on generalizations and short on specifics to support your seat of the pants observations. There aren't many 3100lb RWD cars with 260hp that drive like crap- I suppose the Soltice is the first.

Conclusion: Magrath is another biased import lover. The Mustang comment at the end isn't enough to change that fact. Hey Magrath-I heard there is an opening over at Consumer Reports. You'll fit right in there. You can applaud Toyotas all day long and they'll pay you well for it.

You know, maybe it actually is flak. But I'll bite.

@1487...

"you were the one telling me that the SRX was slower through the slalom than its European competitors when your own site says otherwise"

I honestly don't remember telling you this, but for the record, in our Edmunds comparison test the SRX (63.2 mph) was indeed slower through the slalom than its three European competitors: the Volvo XC60 (65.0 mph), Audi Q5 (64.3) and Mercedes GLK350 (63.3). I just looked at the track sheets again. All were tested on the same day and same track, with the same driver.

I can see where your confusion comes from, though. In earlier Full Tests of the GLK and Q5 (different days and different cars with different specs), their slalom speeds were slower than the SRX's. And in the comparison test, only the Volvo's best-in-test slalom figure was mentioned. Put all that together and you've got a second-place finish for the SRX, right? Right, because you didn't have all of the comparo numbers at hand.

I'll take responsibility for that. The blog format doesn't allow us to list a separate page with all the numbers, so we have to pick and choose what makes it into the text. For the luxury crossover comapro, I chose to mention only the test-leading slalom number, since slalom numbers aren't really significant concerns for buyers of these vehicles. But that meant readers would not have access to the other slalom figures, and obviously some confusion resulted. I'll keep it in mind next time. Note, however, that the comparo praised the SRX's handling anyway, stating that we all preferred its feel over the better-slaloming Volvo -- an example of how slalom numbers aren't necessarily useful measures of real-world performance.

"you likely missed it when I said (repeatedly) that the S5, G37 and 3 series are amongst my favorite cars"

I didn't miss it, but what's the relevance? We're talking about your attitude toward American cars. Blind patriots may still have an appreciation for certain aspects of other countries.

"Trying to correlate my stance on cars to some sort of refusal to use google is nonsensical."

If I knew that you, Mr. 1487, worked for an online automotive publication, and I had an urge to accuse you of thinking that every non-BMW vehicle drives like crap (among many other blanket accusations you've made), I would first employ my favorite search engine to make sure that my accusation was correct. It's what a reasonable person would do. But blind patriotism and reason don't mix.

"There is nothing wrong with saying an American car drives like crap if there is some basis for it. In this case the stats on the Solstice GXP plus the opinions of others who are paid to do what you do make your opinion sound like 'crap'. BTW- what are the specific reasons the GXP was such a terrible handling car?"

I'll let our track drivers field this one. Scroll down to the "Performance" section on each page and read the comments.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=120013/pageId=120945

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Followup/articleId=142586/pageId=161683

-JS

"Well sports coupes are known for large trunk openings"

Sports coupes aren't known for taillights, but they're nice to have too.

"Stop trying to establish a name for yourself by following me around and responding to all my posts. Do your own thing. Come up with an intelligent contribution. Read more about cars and learn things like the Mustang has an OHC engine."

Seriously. WTF? Name for myself? PLEASE, don't flatter yourself. Being an overopiniated jackass doesn't mean YOU have made a name for yourself. LOL! Iam sorry that is just too funny. And when did I say anything about a Mustang?

Good response though, its what every domestic fanboy does when they get tired of writing crap that they mistakenly confuse as smart points.

Again LOL!

You, 1487 are very funny. Iam actually surprised you haven't been asked to star in a Jackass sequel.

SadButTrue: don't feed the troll, its not worth your time or effort.

^That's interesting. Trolling is the new flak, I suppose, or a new variety of it. Anyway, I want to believe that people who post regularly here can be reasoned with. If they care enough about cars to read all our stuff and write copious commentary on it, then I care enough to engage with them.

-JS

JS, I would think by now its fairly obvious that 1487 is a lost cause - he never admits he is wrong and will even change his opinion in the effort to sound right. I got into a few large thread-arguments with him back in the day, but I do my best to avoid it these days because no matter what you write, no matter what you quote, no matter how much you say he will just keep throwing his crap back at you. He also goes out of his way to provoke, whether it be an editor or a fellow commenter. I guess when he is criticizing your professional opinion, its difficult to standby and let that happen. I know Karl had issues with this - a few other members of your staff if I remember correctly.

I can't decide if the post itself or the 60 comment thread following it is more entertaining. Enjoyed both, though.

I really like these textcasts. Please keep them coming! It's enjoyable to hear more unplugged opinions of the editors, whether I agree with them or not.

Personally, between a Camaro SS, Mustang GT500 or GT-R, I'd be happy to see any of them in my garage.

Doug:

In order to admit I was wrong in regards to any discussion we've had I would need to be wrong. Your opinion isn't "right", its your opinion. Automotive facts are facts and anything else is subject to intepretation. I'm not a lost cause because I don't agree with everything you post.

In additon- I find it curious that you have no problems with blatant trolls like ACE but you spend so much time worried about my comments. ACE has been OBVIOUSLY trolling for some time and I've yet to any response from you.

Josh:

1. for once you acknowledge a mistake. Bravo. Saying the SRX was slower when no one but IL staffers had access to the information is questionable. But don't worry, even though IL's numbers supported what I said doug is here to tell you I'm a troll.

2. You will find no evidence of "blind patriotism". My experience tells me that those who worship at the altar of German cars (or Japanese) tend to get dismissive when their worldview is questioned. I don't like all American cars. My premise is simple: generally speaking there is parity amongst similar vehicles and in some cases American vehicles are superior to their import counterparts. Its a reasonable notion that is supported by what I post here. Until Ford got its act together my general opinion was that only GM made SOME vehicles that were comparable to the import competition. Now I can say that Ford and GM are designing fully competitive vehicles. People tend to try and demonize their opponents to avoid actually dealing with the specifics of the issue. If you think presuming you know my motives helps your case than so be it.

3. Based on everything you are saying it appears that the SRX's real weakness is the same one I have acknowledged from the beginning- the base engine. This is what I've been saying from the beginning and yet you were the one telling me repeatedly the vehicles wasn't competitive in any way. Now it seems like you are saying the handling is midpack and you already said the interior was high quality. You criticize it's cargo capacity even though its about the same as the GLK and Q5. Based on the comments and evidence my original point still stands. Aside from the medicore acceleration it is competitive with the Euro crossovers .