In this month's Automobile, the On The Block section reviewed an auction for a '72 Vette convertible, 350 auto, yellow on black. They described it as "Just a car." There was no picture posted. It sold for $14080.

In the same section, they reviewed the auction of a '71 Porsche 911S Coupe. "Correct beige over black vinyl. A true S model with a 2.2-liter engine good for 160 horsepower....Very attractive overall." A picture was posted. The car sold for $28160. The commentary said "These cars make great sounds, have timeless lines, and, if kept in good condition, will never go down in value."

Listen, I love Porsches. I appreciate what they are and would like to own one.

But why the constant bias against Corvettes? Why is the Vette "just a car" while the Porsche, with much less horsepower and a questionable color combo raved about? I'm tired of the "Yeah, Vettes are great and all, but..." What inevitably follows is cheap this, or crude that. Our 70's Vettes, for the longest time, were slammed the most (this seems to be fading). Still, if it's German, BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, the magazines go gaga over them. While the Vette, along with other American cars, get the tongue in cheek comments, half compliments, and praise not absent of qualifications (i.e. one of the best sports car values under $$).

Where is the commentary about the stark Porsche interior or the viscious throttle off oversteer? What about the replacement costs? Why is this overlooked. The Vette in the above example was stored for a long time, and they didn't even take a breath before noting the possible pitfalls with a car that has been stored for a prolonged time period.

I don't expect most Vettes to have snob appeal. I don't want Vettes to have snob appeal. But I do expect the facts to speak for themselves. The Vette deserves pure respect based on what it's accomplished over the years, and what it continues to accomplish. I'd really like them to describe these cars for what they are, in their historical context.

The Porsche in the above example certainly received that consideration, while the Vette is labeled "just a car." No Vette is just a car.

Is this media bias in my imagination? Am I being too sensitive? Or do you all see and feel it too?

:rant:


[Modified by joeveto, 8:25 PM 9/26/2003]

 

i totally agree with you on that! vettes are not just a car! people here(where i live), look at vettes as just another car for some dude to make up for his small *****. thats BS! however, you see some guy rollin in on a Escalade with 24s or Mercedes clk and these are suppose to be considered in a higher class in ones view when compared to a vette! In my opinion, big SUVs with big bling wheels are makin up some poor/rich man's manhood.. joeveto, this topic always fires me up. i agree with you man totally. :mad




[Modified by Redshark6974, 8:31 PM 9/26/2003]

 

Any mag article will reflect the bias of it's author. A peculiarly negative slant to a story or reference toward a 30+ year old classic of any brand only reveals more about the narrow mindedness of its creator than it does the vehicle under scrutiny.

You're reading the wrong magazine.

dr

 

If my Vette was just a car, when I park her on the street, I wouldn't get complete strangers walking up to me to talk about their own "vette" experiences from their pasts, or what year is it? Or is that a 70- or a 71? Or that's a great car... etc. -Don't see that too often with the Porsches, not to knock em. Just not the same factor of everyman cool.

 

I've always looked at those Porsches and said: "Hey look....a VW with a body kit.....":)......nobody can say that about a C3......totally innovative design and engineering, which appeals to all sorts of different people of all ages even 30 odd years after the fact.........

I've never read Automobile (and I'm not planning to), but I find a lot of these car magazines try to be something for everyone....and end up glossing over every subject and serving up shallow and redundant advice about nothing....

......and think of the poor saps writing this poo...they've mortgaged their lives to study "journalism" only to end up pulling their hair out everyday trying to invent a new adjective to describe the latest road test; the basic concept of which hasn't changed in the last 40 years.....

....these magazines are fine if you're on the toilet waiting for the plane to fly in......but when I want a real learning experience, I'll pick up the Corvette Assembly Manual......

.....and BTW, a Vette man can never be too sensitive....... :)

 

I've had 3 911s and 3 Corvettes. They are both great cars. I can ensure you that a 911 is a heckuva lot more than a VW with a body kit. They may share technology but a Vette has some things in common with a Caprice too. As someone said above, you get the opinions of the author when you read a magazine article. I can tell you how unfair they are for sure! I'm a Fiero fan and collector as well as Corvettes and 911s. After owning 16 Fieros I can tell you that they are great cars! But hardly anyone, including most Vette owners I know, is willing to give them a second glance. After a lot of years playing with these cars, I am sorta glad that people look over them.. It makes them cheaper for me to buy!

Here's the street in front of my house... and I have 3 more Fieros that aren't pictured...

 

You have just detailed my favorite thing about California right there. People care about classic cars here (Vacaville). I get dudes in all kinds of vehicles revving their engine at me, not to signal a race, but because they're asking me to rev mine. I quick blip to 3,600 in idle lights the largest smile on their faces...and torques the car noticibly.

Car people rule, even if they're driving a SUV on dubs. :cheers:

 

Frankly, i'ts the whole 'German' attitude thing they buy into, there is nothing about any German car that's all that superior overall....nothing...
they have some glaring shorcomings along with any other car, but it's that snotty press attitude cultivated by their car companies that filters into the press releases...and mistakenly colors their commentaries....
German cars rust out just as fast, if not faster, the engines blow up and burn oil too, brakes fail, interiors lead the way in cheezy plastic and uncomfortable seating/ride positioning....meant for short people....they are allways mechanical nitemares under the hoods....
somehow that engineers' penchant for geekey cars, as most of the Mercedes, Porsche, BMW customers were of tech backgrounds....somehow that has melded into a very successful sales gimmic....
no one will ever convince me any Mercedes for example is worth that kind of money, and certainly not with any diesel.....I see their cars fairly priced at about 1/2 what they ask....sometimes even that is a stretch....

GENE

 

I used to get Car and Driver but cancelled my subscription when they went out of their way to praise every piece of econo mobile that came from Japan and bashed every American made car.....in every issue. I have only owned American made cars (except for my first car and 1973 MGB) and I have always thought these magazines write unfair biased articles about American cars. I too owned a 1986 Fiero and it was a GREAT car......probably the best car I ever owned but people would actually laugh at me when I pulled up in the thing....I wish I still had it. I put over 150,000 miles on it and the only thing that was ever replace was the air conditioner compressor UNDER WARRENTY! Now I just turn a blind eye to comments made about American Iron. I think American car manufactures make some pretty good products now and in the past. Every car company in the world that mass-produced vehicles have quality problems period. You can't produce 100,000 copies without some problems. As far as our C3's are concerned, I think Chevy did one hell of a job mass-producing essentially a hand made car. To all the bashers out there I give you the two up


[Modified by theandies, 7:31 AM 9/27/2003]

 

It's not just a car, it's an experience. :cool:

 

Nope! They just think we're all too stupid to form our own opinions. That's why they are compelled to interject their opinion so readily. :lol:

Gee, and I was just considering a certified BMW for my next vehicle. :D


[Modified by 1970 Stingray, 5:36 PM 9/27/2003]

 

What's wrong with an air-cooled Beetle? Admittedly, I could do without the body-kit.... :confused:

 

I find Automobile Magazine caters to European cars a great deal and frowns upon the American counterparts. They picked a BMW M3 as the best sports car on the market for chirsts sakes! :lolg:

 

Okay guys, here's the viewpoint from an automotive journalist, a Corvette owner (and a former Porsche owner.)

The point the author is trying to make is that there's nothing really spectacular about a base '72 Corvette among performance cars or, more importantly, other Corvettes. That's not to say that it's a bad car, or doesn't turn heads...it's just another average C3 Corvette -- which among special interest cars is just another car.

Now, on the other hand, a 911S is the -- if you will -- 427 tripower of 911 brand (not quite a L88, that would be the RS or RSR.) 911 came in 911T (for Touring, not Targa,) 911E and 911S. 911S examples are not necessarily ultra-rare, but they are desirable because they are the highest horsepower.
And whereas the C3s peaked at '69 or '70 and got worse quickly with emissions equipment and safety regulations, the perception is that the 911 examples just kept getting better (although the late 70s cars are notorious for engine trouble.)

Yes, there's a bias -- but for the most part the biases shown by writers is based on a combination of truth and personal preference based on size and background (I'm a tall guy who likes road racing, so I don't like cramped cars meant to go just in a straight line.) The fact of the matter is that magazines have always felt the Corvette was akin to a hatchet, whereas the Porsche was a scalpel. Both are good at cutting, but the Vette has always used brute-force over precision. Let's face it, Vettes achieve with brute force what European cars achieve with technology. Vettes cost less, but deliver less refinement. It still holds true today. I, for one, don't mind the cheap interior plastics of my '02 C5 convertible compared to the extra $40K it would have taken for me to buy a new 911 convertible.

I think you'd all be amazed how many of the journalists who regularly bashed the Corvettes back in the day (and even now) have owned Corvettes. I'm one of the Corvette's toughest critics, and I've owned five.

Say or think what you want, but the 911S handled better than the Corvette (Road and Track: 1970 comparison shows this.) It also was more comfortable, had easier ingress/egress and was less brutal in which to tour (which is what most Porsches and Vettes were used for.) Corvettes had more power, and were generally more reliable (911S was notorious for fouling plugs in traffic,) but also tended to fall apart easier. A 911 would have a catastrophic failure if neglected, while in a Corvette, even if you pampered it, stuff would fall off (while it ran forever.)

In terms of the used car market, both have been hurt by styling that lasted into the 80s (and 90s with the 911) without really changing. The 911 styling was considered a progression of the 356, but the Stingray was bashed when new for "flashy" styling that was too derivative of ten-year-old Ferrari GTO.

Where the rubber meets the road, they are both great cars. For twisty roads, I'd take a 911 any day over a C3...the steering, brakes and suspension are just so much more involving. For cruising and straight-line fun, the C3 is unstoppable (certainly in big block form.) Personally, I like the flashier design, because the 911 is just too "see it every day."

And as an interesting note...I too am dropping my Car and Driver and Motor Trend subscriptions, not because they bash cars, but because they don't bash cars for fear of losing advertisers. I'm sick of my fellow auto journalists selling out their integrity in exchange for free press benefits like racing schools, being flown to unveilings and being wined and dined by manufacturers who caution the writers to say good things or the gravy train ends.

Maybe that's why I get so few freebees!

Cheers,
Sam

 

I'll show you: :)

 

1960's rice! :lol: Love those deep dish wheels on the front.

 

It probably has to do with the quality of the workmanship. A porsche was designed from the ground up to be a sports car. A Corvette is made in "Detroit" (I know .. not REALLY Detroit geographically, but u get my point).

Now, this isn't to ssay you can't have fun with a Corvette. Just, a 1971 Porsche and a 1971 Corvette are really very different cars.

 

I had a 71- 911E and could not wait till i could sell it and get back into Corvette's hated working on the think and no ways near the thumbs up's form others --never again--my 2cents worth-Glenn :banghead: :auto:

 

There is absolutely no doubt that you'll get more -reaction- from bystanders in a Corvette. Still, auto journalists tend to be more of a mindset that what makes a car great is how it drives and looks to the owner.

My '70 911T was equally as beautiful as the '69 and '70 as I had at the same time -- certainly more timeless, which actually is what hurts the car in its image with the masses. In other words: "how does the layman tell if it's a classic 911 or a new one?" The answer is: they don't. It's easy to distinguish a new Corvette from one that is at minimum 21 years old.

 

I set-up a subscription to Automobile as they seemed to spit out their true feeling about cars which I thought was refreshing.

About bias, Ive noticed a few times that they seem to try to compare other sports car to the Z06, if thats possible. On the other hand, they have bashed the C5 for interior quality, but that seems about it.

On Car and Driver TV today, they did a 911 GT3 review with a quick comparo to the Z06 in performance and value. Guess who wins out in both :D

Brent...