View Poll Results: Who is the worst review champ?
Voters: 32. You may not vote on this poll
Most aggravating evo review ever!
I usually don't do this kind of thing, but I wrote an open letter to him about his piece.
--
Mr. Rundles
I am writing you this open letter in regard to your recent ColoradoBiz contribution, entitled "Executive Wheels". Why, exactly, do you think that some cars "just don’t merit a review?" There are many different kinds of people with a wide variety of transportation needs. It seems to me that the only ones not needing a review would be the ones nobody would ever buy and it is common sense that every vehicle on every dealer lot will eventually be sold.
You say that, "some of the cars I test-drive just get lost in the review shuffle." I'm surprised folks keep loaning you cars if you keep losing them. Instead of trying to hold a myriad of test drive details in your head, buy a log book. This is especially important for subjective data such as a vehicle being uncomfortable during long rides.
I share you concern that Jeep may be getting the short end of the stick by participating the corporate platform sharing. However, all credibility about such a statement goes out the window with remarks such as, "My only complaint was this: the pillars supporting the roof, the pillars that come down in the front between the windshield and the side windows...". I think you mean to say A-pillars. For what it is worth, the Compass A-pillars are not shared with the Caliber.
I should also address the statement, "What is most interesting about these vehicles is that they are unique." Unique is an absolute term. There can only be one unique anything. Perhaps you meant that they are distinct or are in some way set aside from the rest of the corporate stable by platform differentiation.
Your Volvo C70 review starts quite well in comparison. Hardtop convertibles are a glory to behold in person. They are sure to astound children, wives, husbands, business clients, or the proverbial Joneses.
Being a resident of the of the mountainous Western US, I can appreciate the the substantial barrier from the elements they provide when compared to ragtops. I certainly would not have wanted to be motoring around in one of the vinyl-clad Volvo convertibles of old these past few weeks. Record snowfall and leaky button latches don't mix.
It is unfortunate that you didn't mention the great engineering effort that Volvo puts into the safety of its vehicles as this would surely make it stand out from the similiar offerings of Pontiac, Mercedes, and -- possibly -- Mazda. You are correct that the C70 is not racecar though. Its substantial front weight bias, front wheels drive, and poor suspension geometry would not fool any serious driver into thinking that it was a performance machine. We'll get to that in a moment though.
I am perplexed by your comment that "Powered by a 2.5-liter I5 (as in 5 cylinder) engine, and boosted by a turbocharger, this engine puts out 218 hp in the European tradition of feeling like more than that. It is powerful, quick, and smooth." Firstly an engine is not powered by an engine. Your grammar checker missed that one, but a proofreader would not have. More to the point, you surely must realize that it is not the peak power number that provides that gratifying gusto when you stomp on the accelerator. Instead you are feeling the effect of the approximately 240 ft.lbs of torque the T5 engine produces between 1500 and 5000 RPM. Furthermore, you neglected to mention that a turbocharged engine would be less affected by the Colorado elevation than a naturally aspirated engine. At 6000', a normal, American V8 would be down 20% on power from the manufactures claim. However that Volvo T5, running 14.7 psi of boost, would only be down 10%.
"And relatively affordable." Is there a sentence in there somewhere?
Now we come to the Lancer Evolution. The foundation of your review is stated, "It is uncomfortable, it rattles like a bag of bolts, it is cheaply made, it is noisy." Like me, I'm sure you have a copy of the Chicago Manual of Style rolling around your office somewhere. It is time for a refresher course. This time you actually have sentences and they need punctuation.
It would be unfair for me to resist disclosing that I am an owner of a 2004 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. I have two degrees from a top 10 US research university and I have recently worked with leading researchers in the fields of Mathematics, Computer Science, and Economics. My most former boss was the 2000 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics. I say this to stress the fact that I have not failed any IQ tests recently. Car choice is not an illustration of mental prowess, nor is the ability to talk a salesman down to invoice price.
From the statement, "When they told me they were bringing me a Mitsubishi Lancer, I looked it up online", I take it that you did not solicit an Evolution to test. I have seen no official demographics of your readers, but I assume they are affluent business professionals in the Colorado area. ColoradoBiz is certainly not a publication for the car enthusiasts to whom the Evolution appeals. With its high rear wing, stiff ride, and high maintenance cost, I would never consider recommending it to someone needing to take clients to dinner or make frequent visits to field offices.
Simply stated, the Evolution is pure driving machine. It is much more of a performance vehicle then the aforementioned Volvo C70. I had the experience recently of discussing the rear suspension design of the Volvo with a driver for the Volvo Factory Race Team. Interestingly he stressed how limiting the Volvo design is, and how much better Mitsubishi did with the modern Lancer Evolutions. This was not an accident. The Evolution suspension has been under design for no less than 15 years and has seen a tremendous amount of competitive use. I'm not referring here to pesky teenagers on a Saturday night, but rather professional Works teams competing at the highest level of motorsport.
You seem surprised that the Evolution demands a price tag north of $30k, but you would not be if you had done the smallest amount of research to find how why it is priced in that range. I take it you missed the aluminum body panels, aluminum suspension components, Brembo 4-pot brakes, electronic active center differentials, front and rear limited slip differentials, 200 additional body welds, Momo steering wheel, carbon fiber wing, and extreme high performance tires. This, of course, is in addition to the 4G63T motor which has, at the time of writing, the highest power to displacement ratio of any production car engine.
These details mean very little to most car buyers who will not be taking their vehicle to the limit of the performance envelope on a regular basis. It is fair to say that the Evolution appeals only to racecar drivers and those wanting only to take in the simple enjoyment of driving. Its purpose is not to be a simple A to B form of transportation. It is, after all, a very low production car. To view it otherwise is to sell is short. Almost everyone who has driven it has called it performance bargain beyond belief. It is often put along side the new Corvette Z06, Porsche 911, and BMW M3 as one of the great sports cars of the past decade. It is a shame that you missed that experience.
I wil be in Denver this coming February with my Evolution. I am happy to bring it by if you would like to re-evaluate the model with a car that has been broken-in and seen a few more highway miles. I do not daily drive it, so the interior is still as new. I regret that my schedule does not permit me to leave the car in Denver for an extended test. I really have no stake in improving the Evolutions image (except of course to raise the trade-in value of a car I will probably never sell). I am simply saddened that someone drove this wonderful car but missed the wonderful performance experience.
To the comment, "Toyota and Honda have been so successful, for so long, making solid, but unsexy cars that sell and sell and sell", I must ask, what about the Toyota Supra and Honda NSX? Are they not sexy or are you just not considering them successful. They are certainly an important part of why those companies occupy their current spots in the marketplace and not something you see other companies successfully 'knocking off'. As to your original point, I agree. We don't need anymore knockoffs in this world -- be it bland econocars or armchair automotive journalists.
Sincerely,
Donour Sizemore
--
Mr. Rundles
I am writing you this open letter in regard to your recent ColoradoBiz contribution, entitled "Executive Wheels". Why, exactly, do you think that some cars "just don’t merit a review?" There are many different kinds of people with a wide variety of transportation needs. It seems to me that the only ones not needing a review would be the ones nobody would ever buy and it is common sense that every vehicle on every dealer lot will eventually be sold.
You say that, "some of the cars I test-drive just get lost in the review shuffle." I'm surprised folks keep loaning you cars if you keep losing them. Instead of trying to hold a myriad of test drive details in your head, buy a log book. This is especially important for subjective data such as a vehicle being uncomfortable during long rides.
I share you concern that Jeep may be getting the short end of the stick by participating the corporate platform sharing. However, all credibility about such a statement goes out the window with remarks such as, "My only complaint was this: the pillars supporting the roof, the pillars that come down in the front between the windshield and the side windows...". I think you mean to say A-pillars. For what it is worth, the Compass A-pillars are not shared with the Caliber.
I should also address the statement, "What is most interesting about these vehicles is that they are unique." Unique is an absolute term. There can only be one unique anything. Perhaps you meant that they are distinct or are in some way set aside from the rest of the corporate stable by platform differentiation.
Your Volvo C70 review starts quite well in comparison. Hardtop convertibles are a glory to behold in person. They are sure to astound children, wives, husbands, business clients, or the proverbial Joneses.
Being a resident of the of the mountainous Western US, I can appreciate the the substantial barrier from the elements they provide when compared to ragtops. I certainly would not have wanted to be motoring around in one of the vinyl-clad Volvo convertibles of old these past few weeks. Record snowfall and leaky button latches don't mix.
It is unfortunate that you didn't mention the great engineering effort that Volvo puts into the safety of its vehicles as this would surely make it stand out from the similiar offerings of Pontiac, Mercedes, and -- possibly -- Mazda. You are correct that the C70 is not racecar though. Its substantial front weight bias, front wheels drive, and poor suspension geometry would not fool any serious driver into thinking that it was a performance machine. We'll get to that in a moment though.
I am perplexed by your comment that "Powered by a 2.5-liter I5 (as in 5 cylinder) engine, and boosted by a turbocharger, this engine puts out 218 hp in the European tradition of feeling like more than that. It is powerful, quick, and smooth." Firstly an engine is not powered by an engine. Your grammar checker missed that one, but a proofreader would not have. More to the point, you surely must realize that it is not the peak power number that provides that gratifying gusto when you stomp on the accelerator. Instead you are feeling the effect of the approximately 240 ft.lbs of torque the T5 engine produces between 1500 and 5000 RPM. Furthermore, you neglected to mention that a turbocharged engine would be less affected by the Colorado elevation than a naturally aspirated engine. At 6000', a normal, American V8 would be down 20% on power from the manufactures claim. However that Volvo T5, running 14.7 psi of boost, would only be down 10%.
"And relatively affordable." Is there a sentence in there somewhere?
Now we come to the Lancer Evolution. The foundation of your review is stated, "It is uncomfortable, it rattles like a bag of bolts, it is cheaply made, it is noisy." Like me, I'm sure you have a copy of the Chicago Manual of Style rolling around your office somewhere. It is time for a refresher course. This time you actually have sentences and they need punctuation.
It would be unfair for me to resist disclosing that I am an owner of a 2004 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. I have two degrees from a top 10 US research university and I have recently worked with leading researchers in the fields of Mathematics, Computer Science, and Economics. My most former boss was the 2000 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics. I say this to stress the fact that I have not failed any IQ tests recently. Car choice is not an illustration of mental prowess, nor is the ability to talk a salesman down to invoice price.
From the statement, "When they told me they were bringing me a Mitsubishi Lancer, I looked it up online", I take it that you did not solicit an Evolution to test. I have seen no official demographics of your readers, but I assume they are affluent business professionals in the Colorado area. ColoradoBiz is certainly not a publication for the car enthusiasts to whom the Evolution appeals. With its high rear wing, stiff ride, and high maintenance cost, I would never consider recommending it to someone needing to take clients to dinner or make frequent visits to field offices.
Simply stated, the Evolution is pure driving machine. It is much more of a performance vehicle then the aforementioned Volvo C70. I had the experience recently of discussing the rear suspension design of the Volvo with a driver for the Volvo Factory Race Team. Interestingly he stressed how limiting the Volvo design is, and how much better Mitsubishi did with the modern Lancer Evolutions. This was not an accident. The Evolution suspension has been under design for no less than 15 years and has seen a tremendous amount of competitive use. I'm not referring here to pesky teenagers on a Saturday night, but rather professional Works teams competing at the highest level of motorsport.
You seem surprised that the Evolution demands a price tag north of $30k, but you would not be if you had done the smallest amount of research to find how why it is priced in that range. I take it you missed the aluminum body panels, aluminum suspension components, Brembo 4-pot brakes, electronic active center differentials, front and rear limited slip differentials, 200 additional body welds, Momo steering wheel, carbon fiber wing, and extreme high performance tires. This, of course, is in addition to the 4G63T motor which has, at the time of writing, the highest power to displacement ratio of any production car engine.
These details mean very little to most car buyers who will not be taking their vehicle to the limit of the performance envelope on a regular basis. It is fair to say that the Evolution appeals only to racecar drivers and those wanting only to take in the simple enjoyment of driving. Its purpose is not to be a simple A to B form of transportation. It is, after all, a very low production car. To view it otherwise is to sell is short. Almost everyone who has driven it has called it performance bargain beyond belief. It is often put along side the new Corvette Z06, Porsche 911, and BMW M3 as one of the great sports cars of the past decade. It is a shame that you missed that experience.
I wil be in Denver this coming February with my Evolution. I am happy to bring it by if you would like to re-evaluate the model with a car that has been broken-in and seen a few more highway miles. I do not daily drive it, so the interior is still as new. I regret that my schedule does not permit me to leave the car in Denver for an extended test. I really have no stake in improving the Evolutions image (except of course to raise the trade-in value of a car I will probably never sell). I am simply saddened that someone drove this wonderful car but missed the wonderful performance experience.
To the comment, "Toyota and Honda have been so successful, for so long, making solid, but unsexy cars that sell and sell and sell", I must ask, what about the Toyota Supra and Honda NSX? Are they not sexy or are you just not considering them successful. They are certainly an important part of why those companies occupy their current spots in the marketplace and not something you see other companies successfully 'knocking off'. As to your original point, I agree. We don't need anymore knockoffs in this world -- be it bland econocars or armchair automotive journalists.
Sincerely,
Donour Sizemore
Last edited by donour; Jan 4, 2007 at 07:36 PM.
Newbie
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
From: Bakersfield (Smells great here come visit!)
OK I dunno if anybody mentioned this yet but here goes....ITS a publicity stunt!!!! Hehe he knows there's tons of evo owners out there so why not create some traffic to his website? We're all falling for this evil tricks. Kinda reminds me of those freakn 1 penny hard drives they had a couple months ago and cancel your order due to price errors hehe. Still what an A hole, I say we all drive our evos to their office and have a anti-low-IQ journalist strike hehe.
repost! and now everybody is visiting their site. thanks to this moron journalist they got so many more views a day than ever before... should've just ignore what he says and enjoy our beloved car...
Thanks goodness the topic is only cars.
d
Evolving Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
From: rialto
you guys, Ive already emailed all the emails below regarding this review, if he does a horrible review on the evo and the wrx, I can only imagine what else he is defacing. We need to have this stopped and make sure he gets fired, but the only way is everyone like myself needs to send hate email to all the aformentioned emails depicted below.... A couple of the emails below are his boss
Contact Information
Publisher
Bart Taylor btaylor@cobizmag.com
Editor
Robert Schwab rschwab@cobizmag.com
Managing Editor
Mike Taylor mtaylor@cobizmag.com
Online Editor
Keith DuBay kdubay@cobizmag.com
Art Director
Tom Visocchi tvisocchi@cobizmag.com
Contributing Writers
Cathie Beck, Lynn Bronikowski, Eric Peterson, Jeff Rundles, Stewart Schley, Stephen Titus
Advertising Account Executives
Leslie Pera, 303-662-5210, lpera@cobizmag.com
Hospitality, Real Estate, Professional Services, Government/Associations, Consumer Retail, Utility, Transportation, Education/Training, Technology/Computers/Telecommunications
Becky Fenton, 303-662-5222, bfenton@cobizmag.com
All online advertising.
Event inquiries- Top Company, Gubernatorial Debate, CEO of the Year, Minority Business Breakfast.
Siobain French, 303-662-5206, sfrench@cobizmag.com
Healthcare, Auto, Legal, Finance, Business-to-Business Retail, Insurance, Manufacturing
Keelan Smith, 303-662-5202, kksmith@cobizmag.com
Marketing Coordinator- Contact for reprints and plaque inquiries.
ColoradoBiz Fax: 303-397-7619
ColoradoBiz Office:
7009 S. Potomac Street
Suite 200
Centennial, CO 80112
Main Office Number: 303-662-5200
Contact Information
Publisher
Bart Taylor btaylor@cobizmag.com
Editor
Robert Schwab rschwab@cobizmag.com
Managing Editor
Mike Taylor mtaylor@cobizmag.com
Online Editor
Keith DuBay kdubay@cobizmag.com
Art Director
Tom Visocchi tvisocchi@cobizmag.com
Contributing Writers
Cathie Beck, Lynn Bronikowski, Eric Peterson, Jeff Rundles, Stewart Schley, Stephen Titus
Advertising Account Executives
Leslie Pera, 303-662-5210, lpera@cobizmag.com
Hospitality, Real Estate, Professional Services, Government/Associations, Consumer Retail, Utility, Transportation, Education/Training, Technology/Computers/Telecommunications
Becky Fenton, 303-662-5222, bfenton@cobizmag.com
All online advertising.
Event inquiries- Top Company, Gubernatorial Debate, CEO of the Year, Minority Business Breakfast.
Siobain French, 303-662-5206, sfrench@cobizmag.com
Healthcare, Auto, Legal, Finance, Business-to-Business Retail, Insurance, Manufacturing
Keelan Smith, 303-662-5202, kksmith@cobizmag.com
Marketing Coordinator- Contact for reprints and plaque inquiries.
ColoradoBiz Fax: 303-397-7619
ColoradoBiz Office:
7009 S. Potomac Street
Suite 200
Centennial, CO 80112
Main Office Number: 303-662-5200
it was more pleasant reading his reply than cobiz's entire article. give him credit. Although I do agree that it's rather futile, props all the same!
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
From: LA
Quote:
"READER RESPONSE
Yuck
Your article belongs in the toilet. That is probably where you wrote it considering the abundance of crap in it."
This guy definitely said it all
I bought the Evo coz I ****ing love RAW POWER and I love aggressive looking car and definitely hate wussies looking cars.
"READER RESPONSE
Yuck
Your article belongs in the toilet. That is probably where you wrote it considering the abundance of crap in it."
This guy definitely said it all
I bought the Evo coz I ****ing love RAW POWER and I love aggressive looking car and definitely hate wussies looking cars.
Evolving Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 291
Likes: 4
From: USA
Okay, the Cobiz review was totally uninformed and the guy should never write another review in his life, but I'm a little puzzled as to why the CNET review is being slated? Did they change it or something - I just read it and seems pretty spot on. The performance is amazing, holds grip, excellent handling, etc, etc, but the cabin technology sucks (i.e. radio, no GPS, etc). That seems pretty spot on. Even the video specifically said "The cabin technology that we look for here", so they specifically said that they are looking for the good radio, GPS, etc. And also they said that it would be easy to upgrade those components. The car itself they called a "Road animal", which is pretty accurate, and they compared it to some high end sports cars...
Am I missing something?? I heard someone say that they were forced to re-write it due to readers comments - what did the original article say??
Thanks!
S.
Am I missing something?? I heard someone say that they were forced to re-write it due to readers comments - what did the original article say??
Thanks!
S.