By on September 2, 2011

Sorry for that crappy music. I didn’t put the music in there — JB

Once more in the Panamera breach, dear friends;
Or close up the blog with our press-car dead.

We (meaning I) have been awfully tough on Porsche’s Panamera this week, what with the Frank Greve article on corruption in the autojourno game and my own confessional regarding my Panamera experience.

To balance out the karma of the Porsche universe, I’ve found an article, published today, where the auto review for Canada’s National Post experiences a blown turbocharger in a Panamera Turbo S.

What happened, it was found out later, was that the right turbocharger (the Panamera has two) let go, pouring oil into the exhaust system. Unfortunately, the exhaust side of a turbocharger routinely reaches temperatures of 900C. Since oil burns at 500C, we had our impromptu car-b-cue. Covered in a fine patina of bromine (the fire retardant in portable extinguishers), clad in scorched bumper and dripping hot oil out its tailpipes, the Turbo S was a sorry sight and had to be medivac’d back to Toronto.

What the shill toady unbelievably corrupt pawn of people who consider him to be basically a robot who can be programmed to spew crap for a lower-middle-class wage journalist, David Booth, writes next may shock you, but it will almost certainly make you laugh.

The full review can be found here. Check it out if you like, but we will cover the relevant bits in the close reading which follows.

The article begins in medias res, as corner workers at the Shannonville race course run towards Booth’s Panamera.

the quad pipes belched a six-foot plume of flame as if the Panamera were trying to storm the Imperial Army on Iwo Jima. I’m pretty sure that wasn’t in the brochure.

What, you mean the part where the Germans helped take Iwo Jima? No, David, that part wasn’t in the brochure. David then goes on to discuss the likely cause of the fire, as detailed above: turbocharger blows up, oil goes into exhaust, massively hyperbolic, death-defying description of minor engine-area fire. Well, since this piece of shit $190,000 sports-car-cum-sedan blew up on a relatively tame track (Shannonville, while nice, is more of a large parking-lot autocross than, say, an inch-perfect recreation of Spa-Francorchamps), Booth then goes on to utterly eviscerate Porsche for building cars that can’t handle simple track work.

Right?

That’s what he does, right?

“So what’s the lesson in this, Dave?” you’re asking. “Don’t buy a Porsche Panamera Turbo S, right?’

Well, not quite. In fact, quite possibly the opposite. You see, though it was the wonky bearing that caused the turbocharger to go kaput (a German technical term related to rapid dispersion of lubricant), I may have contributed at least a little to its demise as my enthusiastic flailing along Shannonville’s long straight was not exactly the ideal way to break in a virtually brand new engine.

No, dumbass. Turbochargers don’t need to break in.

More tellingly, the Panamera’s big 4.8-litre V8 was completely unharmed by the conflagration, despite losing oil for more than half of Shannonville’s 4.03 kilometres with Yours Truly’s foot planted firmly to the metal. (Remember the dullard assertion – I had failed to notice those great plumes of smoke wafting behind me for almost an entire lap.)

That admission, right there, should make sure Mr. Booth never sets foot on a track again in his life. He wasn’t just being a “dullard” — he was risking the lives of others. Chances are that he ignored several flags along the way — that’s typical of journalists. I sat and watched Automotive Traveler’s Richard Truesdell ignore five black flags in a row a few months ago at a trackday event. If another driver had hit Booth’s oil, he could have been killed. It happens, and it happens because of people like Booth.

Okay, enough sanctimony, back to the unintentional humor.

The reason was simple. Porsche designs all its engines for the worst-case scenarios of racing.

One more time:

The reason was simple. Porsche designs all its engines for the worst-case scenarios of racing.

I’m sorry. Once more.

The reason was simple. Porsche designs all its engines for the worst-case scenarios of racing.

I’m reminded of Harrison Ford’s famous comment to George Lucas while filming Star Wars: “George, you can type this shit, but you sure as hell can’t say it”. Never let it be said that David Booth can’t type what Gary Fong or his Canadian equivalent tells him. Let’s continue.

One of the by-products is that the Panamera’s engine carries a whopping nine litres of oil in its semi-wet-sump oil pan rather than the more common four or five.

Again with the “Semi Wet Sump” crap that Porsche has been pushing since the M96. It’s a “Semi Wet Sump” like Charles Manson is a “Semi Murderer”. My 993 has twelve quarts of oil in a true dry sump. If you want that level of genuine engine protection, buy a pre-2008 997 Turbo or any other Porsche which has roots in the old air-cooled cars. Don’t buy a watercooled Boxster/Cayman/Carrera, and don’t buy a truck, and don’t buy a Panamera.

Pretty much any other turbocharged motor would have lunched its components under the same circumstances… (In fact, I am going to drive it post-impeller surgery just to see if the doctors have made it as good as new.)

The first part is a lie, the second part — reminding Fong et al that you expect to drive the car again in exchange for fellating its dirty exhaust pipe in public — is probably a good idea. Speaking of, time for the money shot.

So, the lesson is this: Pray you never blow a turbocharger. But, if you do – and turbocharger failure isn’t as uncommon as might be thought – hope that you’re in a Porsche. Or a car that is equally over-engineered.

Actually, David, turbocharger failure in brand new cars is as uncommon as might be thought. Ironically, the 996 Turbo and friends were generally known for having stout turbos. Switzer, AMS, and other companies regularly develop 550-600 wheel horsepower on the stock turbos, and those cars cover a lot of miles in varied conditions. Still, any car can fail at any time. The great thing about this article isn’t that Panameras do or don’t fail, but the lengths Booth is willing to go to show you why a very expensive failure on a brand-new car means the Panamera is awesome.

One last thing. What would have happened if Booth — hold on, I have some more laughing to do. What would have happened if Booth — cough — chuckle — owned a Panamera Turbo and blew a turbo at the track? Yes, I know, the idea of a journalist buying a car is hilarious. The answer is found in the left-hand column of page ten of the Porsche Limited Warranty, which lists exclusionary conditions under which mechanical failures will not be covered:

  • Abuse, accident, acts of God, competition, racing, track use, or other events

A further clarification below:

Note 1:Components and/or parts that fail during racing or driving events (including Porsche sponsored events) may not be covered by the new car Limited Warranty.

Let’s amend Booth’s craven PR ad copy to something that’s a little more real:

So, the lesson is this: Pray you never blow a turbocharger. But, if you do – and you’re in a Porsche – better hope nobody at the track saw it happen.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

72 Comments on “THIS Is How You Review A Porsche: National Post Experiences Panamera Engine Fire, Recommends Panamera Purchase...”


  • avatar
    ehsteve

    On yer knees, ye teutonic toaster-lovers! And the oscar goes to…!

  • avatar
    jplew138

    Oh. My. Goodness. And I thought that ass-kissing was rampant in corrections. Ridiculous doesn’t even begin to describe what I just read. That is utterly disgraceful…but at least the jackass got to ride in a Porsche. Woo hoo…

  • avatar
    gslippy

    That story is fantastic in the truest sense of the word.

    As an engineer, I believe that most turbocharger units run under similar conditions regardless of the engine they’re bolted to (assuming internal bearings, wastegates, and cooling are all equal). It’s the engine itself that takes all the abuse. You don’t hear of lowly Cruze 1.4 turbos or Sonata turbos or TDIs blowing up. For the Panamera to do so is inexcusable, but Mr. Booth manages to provide one, anyway – most remarkable. Perhaps Porsche fouled the turbo cooling/lube system or wastegate, or maybe the bearings failed. In any case, product development involves vetting your suppliers and testing beyond expected parameters, which this bloke didn’t exceed anyway.

    Another nail in the myth about ‘German engineering’.

    BTW, I love how the woman in the video casually strolls by – lunch in hand – while a sport luxury car nearby burns dramatically.

    • 0 avatar
      240SX_KAT

      If I was going to guess what happened, I would blame bad gas, or possibly excessive temperatures at the track.
      It’s amazing how delicate spark plug insulators are. A bit of bad gas results in pinging (before the ECU pulls timing) and shatters an insulator. A small chunk of ceramic can really mess up a turbo’s day. A shattered turbine, seized shaft and an exploded turbine housing are all possible, resulting in the car-b-que.

    • 0 avatar
      korvetkeith

      Different engines have different vibration characteristics. Extreme vibration can cause the turbine wheel’s bushing or bearing oil layer to be insufficient and for metal on metal contact to occur due to relative motion between the turbo housing and the shaft.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I’ll tell ya the National Post Panamera was running great today. Guys back in the shop built a heckuva engine until she lost that turbo and lit up on me. It was fast, but now it’s all burned up. We’ll just have to pack up here and go get em at Bristol.

  • avatar

    “buy a pre-2008 997 Turbo or any other Porsche which has roots in the old air-cooled cars” I don’t understand what this means if there is a post-2008 997.

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      The 2009 997 Turbo has a different engine, which doesn’t take anything like the amount of boost the 2008 car did before blowing up. Switzer has extracted 1000+whp from a stock 2007 996 Turbo block and valvetrain.

  • avatar
    wallstreet

    Can someone tell me why I cannot leave comment under David Booth’s article on National Post? Instead I’m allow to criticize The President of the USA under posting :”Three things Obama did wrong on the economy” ?

  • avatar
    wallstreet

    Oh, wait a minute ! The prostate sucking David Booth disable the comment function under the article :”Holy smoke! Engine glitch causes scene”. This is hilarious.

  • avatar
    Torrus

    Lighten up guys – David writes some great stuff…the term ‘jackass’ is way out of line, and ‘prostrate sucking’ ?
    I enjoy this site a lot, but being civil should be a requirement.

    • 0 avatar
      Detroit-Iron

      I couldn’t understand what you were saying there. (Edited by JB – play nice! )

    • 0 avatar
      kol

      Actually, no, being civil should not be a requirement. Being civil is the reason why this shit is published in the first place. If people were not civil and told these so-called journalists that they were blowing hot air – and directed similar comments at the publications that allow such tripe to be published – maybe things like ethics would have room to exist.

    • 0 avatar
      ihatetrees

      I enjoy this site a lot, but being civil should be a requirement.

      No. Degradation and insult are appropriate when so-called professional journalists whore themselves.
      As Jack and Frank Greve (and TTAC – see http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2008/04/the-truth-about-newspaper-car-reviews/ from ’08)) have demonstrated, the slime ball corruption of journosaur car ‘reviews’ into de-facto promotions and advertisement is endemic.
      Outside of a houses, cars are the largest expense for most people. Readers deserve better.

  • avatar
    MrFixit1599

    I will say this much, even though I cant find the article ATM, when Jack reviewed the V6 Mustang and blew it up on the track, he held off glorifying or damnifying it until a verdict about WHY it blew up came back. I am still waiting for that full verdict.
    He did however leave well enough alone, unlike Mr Booth who still praised the car, even after it BLEW UP WITH MUCH FIRE involved. Seriously?

  • avatar
    Felis Concolor

    The car $#@+ itself on the track and David Booth recommends buying one.

    Bill Hicks said it first, and said it best: SSC.

  • avatar
    mazder3

    “Instead, the Panamera will get a new turbocharger and exhaust system (it could have been flushed but, because the car is brand new, it is being replaced) as well as the repainted bumper cover (even Porsche plastic is tough).”

    He even puffs up the material of the bumper. Incredible.

  • avatar
    LectroByte

    I am curious as to what happens to the car next. Sold to some poor sap as a low-mileage “demonstrator”?

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Never let it be said that David Booth can’t type what Gary Fong or his Canadian equivalent tells him

    I believe that would be Laurance Yap, who used to be (or might still be) a car-carrying senior member of AJAC.

    Some members of AJAC are pretty decent (Jil McIntosh comes to mind) but Mr. Yap used to field some pretty puffy reviews, albeit with very good photographs.

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      Mr. Yap and I have actually been karting together at a non-Porsche-related event. He owns some spectacular watches, too. I quoted him a while ago when Peter Cheney’s kid busted up the 997 Turbo — “I’ll give him another car” — or something to that effect.

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        How common are revolving-door relationships in automobile journalism? I don’t actually mind—like much of industry, you can either do, or regulate—but it does make you twitch a little. It would make me twitch more if it were someone from APA rather than AJAC.

        Of course, I might just be jealous of a fellow Gen-X/Y’er who made it reasonably big and isn’t, eg, watching a SAN resync on a Friday night. I don’t own any nice watches, either. Or any watches.

      • 0 avatar

        @psarhjinian, that’s just the thing. Journalism demands the truth, first loyalty to the citizenry, and independence from the stories being reported. (At a minimum.) The absence of such things – as is clearly the case in about 99% of the paid auto writing these days – is merely PR and should not be referred to as journalism.

        I don’t know how shills like this can sleep at night. You’d think there be demons at the far, empty edges of integrity. Oh wait, filthy lucre makes for cushy beds.

  • avatar
    greaseyknight

    So if I buy a 190k car and drive is “quickly” around a race track I should be worried about the turbos on said 190k car?

    No thank you, for that type of money I expect more. Porsche might want to look into the Chinese turbos on Ebay, they might bea bit more reliable….

  • avatar
    eldard

    What a travesty to do such a thing to a glorious Panamera. But are we sure they didn’t put an Italian engine in there?

  • avatar

    Wow. So this is what 800 words of deep throating look like. The guy even swallows at the end.

  • avatar
    photog02

    This is why the only automotive magazine I trust are the ones from Hemmings. Somehow I doubt Crosley’s marketing people have a death-grip on their editorial team’s danglies.

    What is sad is that this marketing translator will probably still feel pretty good about himself as a driver and human being the next day.

  • avatar
    douglas751

    Shit happens on track, but a blown turbo on a crappy little track can only be attributed to poor design or poor quality.

    Why would anybody ever drive a Panamera on a track? To me, that is irrelevant. A huge, tank of a car on a tight track, that just sounds like no fun at all. My little 1989 C4 964 felt and heavy on most tracks.

    I am sure that the Panamera would be fantastic on the Autobahn. And the load on the engine would be much higher than on a track. I have driven up some hills in the center of Germany at full throttle, 240 km/h around sweeping curves passing Dutch Campers and Heavy trucks that were in the right lane. If you lost a turbo in such a scenario, it would most likely be fatal to the driver of the Panamera or to those in the cars tailing it. So, that turbo should not have failed.

    The Panamera is a good car for rich Italian or German business guys to show off to their Girlfriends. IF you really like to go fast on at Autobahn, an Audi A8, BMW 7 or 5 is a nicer car. To be honest, a Ford Mondeo TDCI will go 240 km/h, handle round-a-bouts better and is nice to look at for a lot less money. So, to me the Panamera is nothing but a mid life crisis car for Doctors, a Johnson extender for cheezballs or a gift for the trophy wife or mistress. What is the point?

    Porsche, you have lost your way. You pander to the rich Chinese and Russians now and have lost your soul. I have owned a few Porsche in the past, but if I every get back into track day driving, it will only be an old 911, 944 or new Mustang.

  • avatar
    Educator(of teachers)Dan

    Fire, Fire, we don’t need no water…

  • avatar
    Jack Baruth

    Watching the video, I have to say that my favorite part is where he basically flees the scene, as if the thing will STOP SMOKING if he just drives it far enough away from the track.

    Doing that would cause NASA or the SCCA to tear up your membership.

  • avatar
    Kevin Jaeger

    I was wondering when you were going to comment on this review. I remember gagging on it a couple of days ago.

    This turkey actually drove most of a lap trailing that massive cloud of smoke in the video? Wow. Just wow.

    And I’ve had a number of cars with turbos – never saw or heard of such a spectacular failure in a brand new car.

  • avatar
    Johnny Canada

    Porsche Presstitute.

  • avatar
    wallstreet

    I’m glad that Booth guy doesn’t work for or affiliated with NHTSA. I cannot comprehend he finishes his review by saying : ” So, the lesson is this: Pray you never blow a turbocharger. But, if you do – and turbocharger failure isn’t as uncommon as might be thought – hope that you’re in a Porsche. Or a car that is equally over-engineered.”,

  • avatar
    troyohchatter

    Actually, I think the lesson learned here is if you are going to take a modern day turbocharged engine and hit the track, ensure it’s one that’s been designed to be thrashed to excess, like an F-150 Ecoboost!

  • avatar
    daviel

    Booth will probably get blackballed for even letting it out that the car imploded, despite his brown nosing
    tutu on a dancing pig article! Porsche deserves the exposure. And they will not even cover the failure under their uber-limited warranty. Good thing the company owns the car. Keep ‘em coming Jack – I love Porsches.

  • avatar
    chuckrs

    I have 3 Audis with 4 turbochargers. The 1.8T I4s have almost 300k miles between them and the original turbos. Just a comparison of car weight and engine size/output makes me believe that each of these cars works a lot harder to get down the road than Jack’s fave sedan with the intrepid Post reporter at the wheel. Was this just an outlier turbo quality wise? Was it poor assembly? Did Porsche just cheap out? Guess we’ll never know. And won’t find out from buff mags either.
    Those other Audi 2 turbos were in a 2.7T. Kablooie. Both of them at the same time. Laid down more smoke than a WWI destroyer escort for a much shorter distance than that reviewer before I shut it down. Never got an explanation there either, but I did get a no charge replacement at 71 months into a 72 month CPO.
    Looks like the only Porsche to aspire to is a GT3 – one that has the old engine. I think GT3s are no longer in production and will come back with the new engine at a later date. I couldn’t afford the freight on a new one anyway.

  • avatar
    Peter

    Jack- among sedans, I suspect my 2008 turbo Subie Legacy with $1,000 in suspension mods might actually be more fun to drive than the Panamera. Or at least an STI or Evo might be. Is this too far a stretch ? Seems one could spend five figures blinging out the interior of one of those cars and still have $100k left over for the price of the Panenema.

  • avatar
    MrWhopee

    This should merit at least a Rolex gold watch for the ‘journalist’ from Mr. Wong. Or maybe a set of Nomex suit would be better?

  • avatar
    VLS_GUY

    This shameless example of ass kissing was not a stand alone article. A companion article right out of the media kit for the 2012 Carrera was also faithfully cut and pasted in: http://life.nationalpost.com/2011/09/01/preview-2012-porsche-911-carerracarerra-s/. Note the space he gave over to the improved fuel economy over the 2011 version. He should look into getting an automated car review generator since if you changed the model name, dimensions and performance numbers the basic outline would work for a VW Jetta TDI.

  • avatar
    ExPatBrit

    At least it “blowed up” like a race-car , so there is that!

    On a road car when the turbo goes it’s usually just bad news for mosquitoes. No spectacular flames.

  • avatar
    wallstreet

    Stay away from license plate BKAX-295 ! Here is what happened afterward:

  • avatar
    slow kills

    How on earth can anyone expect internal engine damage from an external oil fire? As though I can melt pistons with a Zippo and some lighter fluid.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Simple the oil that started the fire came from the engine so the engine may have been run w/o oil pressure, either due to the leak letting a large volume escape or it dumping all the oil out.

      The other thing is that it could have melted the intake duct pieces of which may have made it’s way past the turbo, and possibly taken out bits of the vanes that also made their way further into the engine.

  • avatar

    This site is regarded by some as hostile to General Motors. I happen to think that we’re fair, but the reputation isn’t exactly unearned. It’s interesting that General Motors feels more comfortable with TTAC testing its cars than Porsche does.

  • avatar

    I want to read what Booth has to say about what Porsche will say what caused the turbo failure.

    As for a turbo failure causing an engine failure, that’s not very likely. Booth doesn’t report that oil pressure was down, even though he praises the engine’s lubrication system. I could be wrong but while lubrication is essential to the 100,000 rpm turbos, the actual oil supply line is not that large. It’s only lubricating a couple of bearings. Frankly, with 8 quarts of oil in whatever kind of “semi wet sump” the lube system is, you’d need a much larger oil leak to affect the engine.

    Yesterday during Sprint Cup practice Brad Keselowski ran over a piece of threaded rod that punctured the oil pan. Now NASCAR engines are not dry sumped. They managed to get the car back to the garage and instead of replacing the engine, which you’d imagine they’d want to do just to be sure there was no damage if what Booth says is true, they were lobbying the NASCAR scrutinizers to let them pull the engine but just replace the oil pan.

    Like I said, Booth is silent on the oil pressure gauge or any warning (argh, I hate the i d i o t filter – it won’t let me use a common automotive term) lights. Maybe he doesn’t look at the instruments just like he didn’t look at the rear view mirrors and see all that smoke and flames.

    There are millions of cars out there now with turbochargers (and plenty of superchargers as well). If failure was a common occurrence, we’d have heard about them like Toyota sludge, Honda transmissions, Ford V8 spark plugs and other known problems.

  • avatar

    I wanted to read what Booth has to say about what Porsche will say what caused the turbo failure. He’s now saying it was a seal failure.

    As for a turbo failure causing an engine failure, that’s not very likely. I could be wrong but while lubrication is essential to the 100,000 rpm turbos, the actual oil supply line is not that large. It’s only lubricating a couple of bearings. Frankly, with 9 quarts of oil in whatever kind of “semi wet sump” the lube system is, you’d need a much larger oil leak to affect the engine.

    Yesterday during Sprint Cup practice Brad Keselowski ran over a piece of threaded rod that punctured the oil pan. Now NASCAR engines are not dry sumped. They managed to get the car back to the garage and instead of replacing the engine, which you’d imagine they’d want to do just to be sure there was no damage if what Booth says is true, they were lobbying the NASCAR scrutinizers to let them pull the engine but just replace the oil pan.

    There are millions of cars out there now with turbochargers (and plenty of superchargers as well). If failure was a common occurrence, we’d have heard about them like Toyota sludge, Honda transmissions, Ford V8 spark plugs and other known problems.

    • 0 avatar
      Felis Concolor

      My GLHS suffered a cracked distribution block several years ago and I was still able to limp home over a 10 mile distance even with full loss through the turbocharger supply line. I ended up destroying the center section on the VNT unit, but the pressure lamp didn’t flicker until I finally pulled it into my driveway.

      The vibration-sensitive copper distribution block has since been replaced with a full set of stainless steel Aeroquip fittings.

      • 0 avatar
        Jack Baruth

        If Chrysler ever reintroduces the GLHS with a drive event in the south of France, expect David Booth to amend his article retroactively so that it may be included.

  • avatar

    So Jack, you think it might have gone like this:

    Gary Fong: Hello.

    David Booth: Hi Gary, it’s David Booth. We have a problem.

    GF: Yeah, you’re telling me we have a problem. The video is all over YouTube and Twitter. Boy, PR was easier when every Tom, Dick and Harriet didn’t have a camera and online access.

    DB: Auto journalism too.

    GF: God knows what that a$$hole Baruth will say once he gets ahold of it.

    DB: Gary, nobody listens to him. None of the guys on the last press junket had anything nice to say about him.

    GF: Well, I heard your ex listens to him sometimes.

    DB: Let’s not talk about that. We have a problem.

    GF: I know. Porsche sells cars to people that think they are racers. Sure, the GT2 and GT3 are competent track cars, but our bread and butter customer is the boy and girl racer who talks about “one to one steering”, but would be embarrassed by most autocrossers and amateur racers out on a track. We can’t have them thinking that taking their cars out on a racetrack might break them, even if it will, and we particularly can’t have them know about page 10 of the Porsche warranty: no racing allowed.

    GF: So you’re going to have to spin this positively.

    DB: How can I spin it positively. Thousands of people are laughing at me, the car was shooting out flames, and not the good kind. I could have gotten killed!

    GF: Calm down. Here’s what you can say: First, say that everyone’s turbos fail, that it’s not an uncommon problem. Then say that even though one of the turbos failed, the Panamera is so over-engineered that you were able to make it back to the pits without damage. You might even make a self-deprecating joke about not noticing the smoke.

    DB: Won’t that make me look like a fool?

    GF: [narrows his eyes and stares at Booth] Are you on the list for a test drive of the 918?

    DB: Well, it is always good to to not take yourself too seriously. How about I say that I didn’t even notice that the engine was down on power?

    GF: That’s probably because driving at 7/10th like you do, you didn’t notice that you were driving a ringer. Ever read about Jim Wangers and the press GTOs?

  • avatar
    Austin Greene

    And that Ladies and Gentlemen, is one of the reasons why I bought a Northstar powered Cadillac and not a Porsche.

  • avatar
    Disaster

    If by some miracle, you do get them to warranty the engine, what is the chance they will also pay to fix all the fire damage. How many things will fail later, from post inferno conditions?

  • avatar

    A journalist washing Porsche’s balls isn’t that concerning to me… A rich person can afford to pay the price of listening to an idiotic review like this.

    But what happens if journalists start doing this for crappy everyday cars like the Chrysler 200?

    What if Fiat says, hey “fat bald journalist guy, you don’t like the Chrysler 200? Well then say goodbye to your invitation to drive the new Ferrari F71X in Italy.”

    I kind of wonder if this already happening. Before Fiat took over, Chrysler was every magazine’s whipping boy, now cars like the 200 and updated versions of Journey, Patriot etc… get decent reviews. Are these cars really that much better, or does Fiat have some tricks up it’s sleeves. Ahem Ferrari, Italian trips etc…


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India