[doc] Re: Practical Classics Magazine
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[doc] Re: Practical Classics Magazine
- From: Phil Peters <PhilPeters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:47:11 +0000
The trouble is, the classic car arena is hugely subjective when it comes down to what a particular individual would call a "good" or even "great" car.
A case in point happened to me this morning: I was idly browsing the motoring classifieds in the Sunday papers at a friendâs house in London when I came across a dealer ad for an Italian sports car (which for the purposes of this exemplum shall remain nameless). The ad said that the car was an â05 reg with 6K miles on the clock, yet it had ALREADY had a new clutch fitted. Ok, fair enough, so clutches in high performance cars are subject to an enormous amount of strain, but in my opinion this sort of component failure is totally unacceptable for a Â75,000 sports car. However, in many peopleâs eyes this just âpar for the courseâ with an exotic. Itâs all subjective.
As far as Practical Classics goes, I can see where youâre coming from in terms of the apparent display of inconsistency in what the magazine thinks about the DMC-12, but Iâm *pretty* convinced that the buyerâs guide was written by a freelance journalist (that right, Martin?), whereas the article you alluded to was presumably written by a member of the Practical Classics editorial staff who, apparently, holds a very different view of the car. Irritating to a DMC fan? Yes. A mistake? Probably not, sadly.
If you read the âstaff sagasâ section of the Practical Classics, the various journalists quite often slag off each otherâs cars. One could argue that overall this is a very democratic form of journaliam: various opinions are presented and you can decide whether you agree or not. Chances are, most readers will already have an opinion about the car in question anyway. After all, the classic car arena is hugely subjective. Which is where I came inâ
Phil Peters
DOC# 84
VIN# 4400
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:06:07 +0000 (GMT) , Mike Sumner <mikebmw316@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I might if I considered myself a reader of the mag, but I don't.
>
> I only bought the last issue because of the DeLorean buyers' guide and even then the rest of the magazine didn't interest me much. As a result I only looked at the current issue in the newsagents as there wasn't enough in it for me to justify buying it.
>
> My preferred car mag is Top Gear, as they seem to get things accurate a lot of the time, and don't tend to make silly mistakes (2 issue in a row), like Practical Classics have.
>
> It shouldn't need someone to write to them about this sort of thing. They are in business to produce something accurate and informative, and when they do not do that they should be aware if it themselves.
>
> What irritates me is that neither of the 2 mistakes they have made have been things that a quick glance wouldn't have picked up prior to going to print. It's not as if they have got minute details wrong, but instead very noticeable things.
>
> I just happen to notice things like this but then it is for subjects and topics like this that the forum is for. There would be no point in it if nobody had any observations to share with others.
>
> Why should it be that inaccuracy is accepted without being challenged.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike Sumner - 178
>
>
>
>Claire Usher <claire_usher71@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> well, thats what the 'readers letters' pages are for Mike :o)
>
>If you are irritated about the way that Practical Classics portray's
>the car we all love, then why dont you put it in writing to them? If
>no one tells them about their innacuracies and "scrappy journalism",
>how can we ever hope that they might actually one day get their facts
>right and print un-biased reports and views on the DeLorean.
>
>Just my 2p :o)
>
>Claire (looking forward to moving into her new home in Derybshire)
>#2292 (looking forward to moving into her new double garage in
>Derbyshire)
>1989 Cavalier 1.6L ("garage? whats a garage?")
>DOC170
>
>--- In doc-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Mike Sumner <mikebmw316@...> wrote:
>>
>> I totally agree Chris.
>>
>> I couldn't believe what I was reading given that the buyers' guide
>was very complementary of the car whereas the opening few lines of the
>current DeLorean feature says something like "is this a good car, no".
>>
>> It's scrappy journalism really and very contradictory, but that's
>life I suppose.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike Sumner - 178
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>DOC UK Website: www.deloreans.co.uk
>Unsubscribe: doc-uk-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>** Unless otherwise stated, all messages posted to the group are assumed public and may be printed in the club magazine **
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Recreation Automotive Sports Delorean part Delorean cadillac
>
>---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "doc-uk" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> doc-uk-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>DOC UK Website: www.deloreans.co.uk
>Unsubscribe: doc-uk-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>** Unless otherwise stated, all messages posted to the group are assumed public and may be printed in the club magazine **
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________________________
What force of nature killed 6,000 Texans in 1900?
postmaster.co.uk
http://www.postmaster.co.uk/cgi-bin/meme/quiz.pl?id=193
DOC UK Website: www.deloreans.co.uk
Unsubscribe: doc-uk-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
** Unless otherwise stated, all messages posted to the group are assumed public and may be printed in the club magazine **
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN