Re: Crap & Drivel (tm) Station Wagon Review

["Richard Klein" <rklein@cris.com>]

On  4 Feb 96 at 17:00, Eliot Lim wrote:

> > For those who have not read the article, the final tally was Volvo
> > 92, Audi 91, BWM 86.
> 
> and what is this supposed to imply?  that engine and chassis is as
> important as cupholders?  this adding up points BS is another reason
> why it's Crap and Drivel (tm).  they should have a separate category
> for cupholders alone.  why should all these various categories be
> equally important as the other categories?

The article in question ("Three Apres-Ski Wagons") starts on p. 76 of 
the March '96 issue of C&D.  The numbers quoted above are the 
"Overall Rating."  C&D says this about the "Overall Rating:" (quoted 
verbatim)
"The Overall Rating is not the total of those numbers.  Rather, it is 
an independent judgement (on a 1-to-100 scale) that includes other 
factors -- even personal preferences -- not easily categorized."

It's my opinion that for practical purposes those ratings should be 
considered subjective.  Ratings aside, I think the body of the 
article contained enough information for the reader to make up 
his/her own mind.  That's IMO, FWIW.  YMMV.

   -Rich

   '85 Audi 5ks   '72 Suzuki GT380
   '85 El Camino  '73 Suzuki GT550 in pieces

    in beautiful Bay City, Michigan