Re: all the news that's fit(?)

[adams@churchill.columbiasc.ncr.com]

> 
> > I have found lack of specific information as a means of
> > hiding deficiences.  I find it important to remember that any car
> > magazine has normaly one data point and the manufacturer at their beckon
> > call (an unrealistic benchmark).  After all it is just their SHO (somewhat 
> > honest opinion).
> > 
> > I go for facts not opinion.
> 
> i gather then that you think that the only way to "measure" the
> "goodness" of an engine is strictly the numbers game, anything that
> can be scientifically and "objectively" measured.  look at it this

I guess "blowing a ____ into the weeds with my ____" is much more 
meaningful.

> where is it decided that mid range torque holds more weight than aural
> entertainment?  nowhere.  it is all subjective what you want to care
> about. 

I agree, if it weren't for J. Greenstreets' subjective opinion about
Audis.  I may not own my subjectively great 90CS.  With it's subjectively 
wonderful mid range torque. IMHO!  So is she pretty or does she have
a great personality?!

> "lack of specific information" can mean nothing more than that
> particular piece of information being irrelevant in the reviewer's
> criteria.  

Check out the latest ad for a Maxima: faster than a BMW (with 20% less
displacement), better gas mileage than a 4-cyl (AWD Suburu) .....
If someone leaves out information they are only advertising the good
qualities, which is fine except in an open forum, like the quattro list,
we should look for ALL the information.

> it is completely futile to try to ram one's own set of criteria down
> the throats of others.

Ah, your finally catching on.

regards,
Daniel Adams