By on May 22, 2012

This video, which was sent to me by a particularly reclusive Canadian cyclist, is forty-one minutes long. It was made by a Fisker Karma owner and it contains an exhaustive review of the Karma’s infotainment system. If you aren’t in the market for a Karma, it is virtually unwatchable.

If you are in the market for a Karma, it’s perhaps the most important video you will ever see.

Brian Greenstone is an Austin-based programmer who owns both an Aston Vantage and Fisker Karma. He claims to be an expert on user interface design and he has an award from Apple to support the point. During the course of his video, he comprehensively deconstructs the way the Karma works. Anyone who is even considering a Karma should see the video. It is detailed, specific, and informative. It was also created by someone who paid his own hard-earned money for the vehicle.

Now, for contrast, let’s take a look at Dan Neil’s advertorial:

Neil says:

Meet the world’s MOST INTERESTING CAR! Every square centimeter of the Fisker Karma riots with clarity, and design intent, and vested individuality, and scorn for convention we haven’t seen since the Tucker Torpedo…

After watching Mr. Greenstone show you how the user interface requires a press on the “up” arrow to move “down” the menu and have permission to touch menu items which were clearly visible previous to said up-touching, it’s highly unlikely that you will agree with Mr. Neil about the whole “riots with clarity” business. Aren’t riots usually affairs which, by definition, are short on clarity? But I digress.

The difference in the two videos is clear enough to supply an entire riot’s worth of clarity, actually. Greenstone’s video is meant to demonstrate how a Fisker Karma works. Dan Neil’s video is meant to be an advertisement for Dan Neil first, and perhaps the Karma second. It’s hard to imagine that anyone who is seriously considering the purchase of a Karma would learn anything from watching Mr. Neil pop his collar and fumble through the pronunciation of “gestalt” — but Greenstone’s video should be required watching for any Karma intender.

Greenstone’s Karma video isn’t the only effort of its kind out there. It’s simply one of the most intelligent and thorough videos available. In the years to come, it’s very possible to imagine that most people will bypass TTAC and its competitors and hit the owner videos the way they currently bypass Motor Trend and visit us. What will the future of auto journalism be then? Will we simply aggregate user-generated content in one place? Will we pull clicks solely by having early access to vehicles before the public? How beholden will we all be to the manufacturers when that’s our only way of keeping an audience? Or will your children tune in to the TTAC Hologram channel to watch my son live-blog an escape from the highway patrol in a hydrogen-powered hovercraft?

Karma intenders don’t have to even think about questions like that. For them, as William Gibson once famously said, the future is already here — it’s just not evenly distributed.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

60 Comments on “Is This Video The End Of Automotive Journalism?...”


  • avatar
    GS650G

    He should be on Top Gear.

  • avatar
    steronz

    “Will we simply aggregate user-generated content in one place?”

    Filter and aggregate, sure. TTAC can’t hope to produce something that detailed for every car out there, but the only reason this video exists is because one smart guy who really likes his cars had some extra time on his hands. Mr. Greenstone isn’t likely to produce similar videos for every $100k luxury sedan on the market, so there will be gaps in the knowledge base on that level. And on the Prius level, there are hundreds of morons who’ve posted YouTube videos that are unwatchable, even for potential buyers.

    We’ll always need experts to filter out the noise and highlight the gems, just like you’ve done here. Crowdsourcing a la reddit only works up to a point.

    The improvement will come in organization. TTAC is still on the firehose model of content management. Gawker has gone to the news feed model, unless you subscribe to their RSS feed. I’m still waiting on the next breakthrough.

    • 0 avatar
      mcarr

      “TTAC can’t hope to produce something that detailed for every car out there, but the only reason this video exists is because one smart guy who really likes his cars had some extra time on his hands.”

      Why not? As you pointed out, this guy has a day job, and still managed to make this video. I would think that “journalists” could crank out higher quality versions for different cars on a regular basis. After all, it IS their day job. But as Jack pointed out, “journalism” today is mostly self aggrandizement and making sure you’re “buttering your bread” on both sides.

    • 0 avatar
      mcarr

      “TTAC can’t hope to produce something that detailed for every car out there, but the only reason this video exists is because one smart guy who really likes his cars had some extra time on his hands.”

      Why not? As you pointed out, this guy has a day job, and still managed to make this video. I would think that “journalists” could crank out higher quality versions for different cars on a regular basis. After all, it IS their day job. But as Jack pointed out, “journalism” today is mostly self aggrandizement and making sure you’re “buttering your bread” on both sides.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “Why not? As you pointed out, this guy has a day job, and still managed to make this video.”

        That’s exactly why he can do it — because he makes a living doing something else.

        A journalist has to move from story to story in order to get paid. Since the demand for a 40-minute review of a portion of a dashboard holds little interest for most people, there’s no money in that story.

        The time devoted to producing that video (which is considerably more than the length of the video itself) could be spent producing several stories that attract eyeballs (and which make an editor and publisher happy), versus one story that gets very few. Time is money, except when you aren’t charging for your time.

      • 0 avatar
        Philosophil

        “The time devoted to producing that video (which is considerably more than the length of the video itself) could be spent producing several stories that attract eyeballs (and which make an editor and publisher happy), versus one story that gets very few. Time is money, except when you aren’t charging for your time.”

        Exactly!

  • avatar

    I love how as he says “at long last driving the Fisker Karma down the 405”, the video cuts away to a triple-box of a two-lane.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    “Is This Video The End Of Automotive Journalism?”

    No. It might be the end of Fisker, though.

    I also hope that it contributes in its own small way to the death of these touchscreen systems. The old style switchgear is easier to use on the fly, less distracting and less fussy.

  • avatar

    And who’s the smirking dude in the passenger seat? I was hoping he was a hired thug paid by Fisker, but he only smiles when Dan says things like “agricultural” and “not terrible”.

    • 0 avatar
      LordDetroitofLondon

      Ha! I was thinking the same (an indication of how “interesting” the mutterings of Mr.Neil were) – Looked like an extra from the Fast and the Furious.

  • avatar
    peteinsonj

    You know, you would expect such a miserable design in a $100 drugstore Android v1 tablet.

    But not in a $100k+ exotic car!

  • avatar
    ihatetrees

    Solid, interesting writing (or any other type of media) requires editing. Let’s hope a market grows for smart, informed TTAC type reviews. If the day come when there’s nothing but a choice between YouTube crap and Dan Neil’s hucksterism, I hope I’m hit by a bus that day.

  • avatar

    Wow! A review of my review, thanks! I’m glad you liked it so much. I’d like to add that just a week after I posted that review the Karma Command Center almost got me killed. In the review I talked about how it’s so easy to hit the fold mirrors button when using the Nav system. Well… I was on the highway and went to the Nav screen to have it route me home. Apparently I hit the Fold Mirrors button while doing it and didn’t realize it until 15 seconds later when I see debris in the road ahead of me. I was about to make a quick lane change, but when I looked over my side mirrors were folded so I couldn’t se anything next to me. I panicked and went straight, but luckily the debris rolled to one side enough that I didn’t hit it. I was so pissed that I wrote to Fisker about it, and they wrote back saying that they agreed it was an issue and would be fixed in the August software update.

    • 0 avatar
      dark1x

      This absolutely blows my mind. That is an incredibly dangerous situation to find oneself in and the car could have cost you your life. Honestly, that is terrible to the point where I would demand that they re-fund every cent you spent on this car. Scary!

    • 0 avatar
      vww12

      Loved your video. Well done, well presented. It really flows! I cracked up in laughter a number of times, too. There is a niche for people who go into issues in depth. Did you see the article on the iPhone transformer? That was sort of the equivalent to this.

      http://www.arcfn.com/2012/05/apple-iphone-charger-teardown-quality.html

      Anyway, the infotainment on my 2004 VW completely kills the one on the Fisker in most aspects but especially in consistency and clarity of function/clarity of indication. Plus, many of the functions are mirrored to the secondary display in between the tach and the speedo; those would help fix some of the issues you found. Besides, it really helps having three independent volume levels: Telematics (Nav Lady + OnStar), Phone, and Audio.

      It also tells you how many PSI there are on each wheel, including the full size spare in the trunk.

  • avatar
    LordDetroitofLondon

    Contrast in information presented. But, not every person wants (or cares about) the level of detail/ tech stuff talked about in the long video, but I know what you mean.Dan Neil seems to make Jeremy Clarkson sound like Einstein. Utterly useless – both tech wise and entertainment wise.

  • avatar

    Dan Neil is entertaining. Not sure that a man his age should have frosted tips, though. I guess everyone’s a star in LA.

    • 0 avatar

      I’ll agree with Ronnie to a point…Dan Neil is entertaining…in print. When he’s had time to think, write, edit and re-write, he’s one of the better ones out there. But off the top of his head on a video camera, you’d never know it was the same guy.

      Clarkson? I’m sure he’s got most of it written out before he gets in front of the windshield-mounted cameras…and if he wants to take an hour or so to get the takes down just so, Top Gear’s budget is more than adequate for that.

      • 0 avatar
        niky

        Nowadays, yes, but even when he was younger, he was genuinely funny in front of the camera, without the flash cards and the script.

        Let’s not forget… Clarkson got to where he was because he already had the innate ability to think up witty remarks on the fly.

        His car reviews and driving, however, are still somewhat rubbish, in parts. But that doesn’t matter… it’s still fun to watch and read.

  • avatar
    doug

    You should also see Brian’s earlier overall video of the Karma:

  • avatar
    Philosophil

    I think the internet and other forms of information technology are windfalls for this kind of obsessive, geeky, rigorously detailed review or overview. Such things are often the expression of an obsessive passion for the subject matter, and the attention to detail found in such things is often far more than any jack-of-all-trades type can achieve with any hope of getting an adequate monetary return from the investment of time needed to produced such a thing. I know these are the kinds of things I typically look for when researching a particular subject matter.

    I do think, however, that there’s also room for more general overviews and summaries of key highlights, for not everyone has this kind of deep interest in a every subject matter, and many are looking for something more general and less demanding.

  • avatar
    Robert.Walter

    Aren’t the both infomercials? One for the journal, one for the programmer…

    “Will we simply aggregate user-generated content in one place?”. Sorry, YouTube beat you to it…

  • avatar
    MeaCulpa

    Auto journalism is dead and has been since the late eighty’s. Cars today are good enough in every meaningful metric, the true lemons that still exist are weeded out by consumer report style publications. Every short term issue or difference that’s even slightly relevant to the consumer the consumer can find by him- or herself with a test drive. The rest is just ego waxing “the new mercury becomes slightly edgy when pushed on laguna”. Wow you don’t say, well what number of mercury drivers will push the limits of his or her new mercury on a race track, two a year?
    Cars are appliances, and the cars that aren’t appliances are not in any way meaningful to test and are bought for reasons beyond reason or logic. So the caterham is fun to drive but impracticable, you don’t say. The ferrari 458 is .4 seconds slower to 60 then the 911 turbo, who cares? So what we’re left with is a bunch of long and winding crap bout ferraris, by writers that think they’re poets.

    • 0 avatar

      “…what number of mercury drivers will push the limits of his or her new mercury on a race track, two a year?…”

      The same number as would have when they made new Mercurys. Zero.

    • 0 avatar
      BobAsh

      Well, go drive an Alfa Romeo Giulietta 1.4 MultiAir TCT, which I have just returned yesterday, and then compare it to the Audi A1 Sportback 1.6 TDI, which I have picked up today. Spend 50 miles in each and then come back and repeat that all cars are equally good today.

      These two cars are perfect examples of car full of “character”, whatever that may be, but kind of unfinished, and perfectly thought-out and executed car with no character at all. And it’s not about taking them to the track and hooning them around – you can tell the difference even when driving normally. From the steering feel to the ballance of the car, ride comfort, soundproofing (notable by its absence in Alfa), to many other nuances – you will know the difference.

      But as a ordinary user, you can just tell the difference between good and bad car. But without lots of seat time in many cars, and countless days spent thinking about them, you probably wouldn’t be able to tell the subtle differences – to describe WHY the car is good or bad.

      Take Mazda3 as an example. Or that Audi. In both cases, ordinary driver will feel that there’s something “special” about the car, that it’s more satisfying to drive than many other cars. A good reviewer will be able to tell WHY it is so. And in which areas these car excell.

      • 0 avatar
        MeaCulpa

        Who said equally good except for you?
        They are both totally acceptable automobiles, sure the audi is probably better, but I would know that for sure given a couple of hour behind the wheel. More importantly I would know exactly how relevant the strengths and weaknesses are for me. But your point is that the raison d’être for automotive journalist is to tell us WHY a car is good or bad? Wow, surly that insight is worth lots, to somebody developing cars, for a buyer? Not so much.

      • 0 avatar
        BobAsh

        No, the point is not to decide which car is better overall. The Audi vs. Alfa is a great example, because while the Audi is better in most objective ways (now leave aside that Giulietta stands against A3 and not A1), there are many other, mostly subjective, reasons to prefer tha Alfa.

        A good review should discuss the reasons why reviewer considers the car good or bad, and describe the stuff you won’t find in technical data. Like in case of these two, where I would call the Audi a better car, but I would prefer to won an Alfa.

        With solid reasoning behind it, it can give you insight in the characters of both cars – and even though you may have a different point of view and different opinion, you would still benefit from the information.

    • 0 avatar
      rpn453

      “Auto journalism is dead and has been since the late eighty’s.”

      /TTAC

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    The one thing I am sure of is that Dan Neil has never reviewed a car that I could afford to own.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    I think everyone missed the problem with user-generated reviews: reliability. I have some familiarity with that, having been one of the organizers of the audio enthusiasts’ forum side “audioasylum.com” in 1999. Audio Asylum was started, in part, as a reaction to the fanboi reviews in audioreview.com, a commercial site with a slick interface and lots of banner ads.
    This particular review by this particular owner may be critical and useful (if not worth 41 minutes of a non-Fisker buyer’s time). But most will not be.

    Of course, Jack’s continuing point is that so-called “professional” reviews from the autojournalists are hardly better that the typical fanboi’s review of his own ride.

    So, I don’t see this as heralding the future death of TTAC, assuming it maintains its current standard. Obviously, reviews are subjective, even though folks like CR try to pretend otherwise. But what folks don’t want is a hidden stream of benefits, favors, goodies and junkets being handed out by the manufacturer in the expectation of a favorable review.

    • 0 avatar

      I think CR manages to make its reviews a lot less subjective than most. But I don’t think subjectivity is necessarily bad, if the reviewer has enough knowledge to give us insights into the car that we would otherwise not have. But I agree with DC Bruce on the problems with both user-generated reviews and so-called “professional” reviews, although with user reviews, as on places like YELP, you can get a good idea of quality if there are enough reviews.

  • avatar

    A well-written/spoken presenter/writer who can evaluate a car within the context of its competitors past and present is more valuable to more people than a monomaniac.

    So, no.

  • avatar

    IN Neil’s defense I’m going to guess he was referring strictly to the styling. That IS very nicely done, and I’d give it an A in concept,and probably a B- in execution, because there are definitely some flaws, although the parts that are done well are done very well indeed.

    As for automotive journalism, it ain’t, because if it were, he would have had to have delved into the user interface, and I enthusiastically second Pch101’s hope that these touch screens go the way of the dodo and the carburetor. The B- execution of the A concept styling, the lousy execution of the touch screen, and the agricultural level weight are all the product of lousy attention to detail on the part of Fisker.

    It’s too bad. This could have been a truly amazing car, instead of the butt of bovine jokes.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      “I enthusiastically second Pch101′s hope that these touch screens go the way of the dodo and the carburetor”

      I would curb your enthusiasm. Sadly, I think that we’re going to see more of this stuff, not less of it.

      Several years ago, I saw a very rough display version of iDrive at the BMW Museum, where it was being touted as the wave of the future. I remember thinking of how awkward it was, not exactly the sort of thing that you’d want to manipulate while driving, particularly on an autobahn.

      Now that it actually exists, not much has changed. I suspect that this widespread push toward screen-based interfaces must be motivated not just by a desire to dazzle the customer with gadgetry, but also by costs. I’m assuming that it must be cheaper to push these damn things than to provide the alternative. It would be odd if the cheap economy cars ended up having better ergonomics than what can be found in a supposed proper sports sedan.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    That Dan Neil makes it through a single day without getting punched in the face is an indictment of our society.

  • avatar
    Wheatridger

    That’s an interesting video even though I care nothing for the Karma. It demonstrates some of the issues that plague all of the screen-based controls that have taken over modern dashboards. They’re modal, so it can be difficult to switch between applications. They can be hard to see, or at night, distractingly bright. They demand detailed attention to read small text. They’re non-tactile, and offer no clues by dashboard location, either.

    If I drove the FIsker Karma, I’d fasten an iPad in front of the touchscreen to handle music and navigation, leaving me cursed with, and cursing at, the “command center” I’d have to use for every other purpose. Even at my far lower price level, I’m struggling find a modern car with simple controls that have fixed locations and functions. I know, flat-screen dash displays are the symbol of modernity. They work well in aviation, where instruments and radar rule, traffic is well-managed and no pedestrians and bicyclists clutter the path. But they’re ill-suited to a moving car in a busy, ever-changing environment.

    I’d love to see a follow-up video review, or a thread question, discussing whether the Fisker’s user interface is much worse than other vehicles, or depressingly typical.

  • avatar
    BobAsh

    Well, after watching the horrible video, I wanted to see what Dan Neil writes about the Karma. And I stumbled upon this:

    “At 5,300 pounds, the Karma is the heaviest four-seater this side of a Cessna.”

    Is it my bad English, or did that Pullitzer-winning ape just suggested that a four-seater Cessna may be heavier than 5300 pounds????

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      That’s a typical Neil-ism… it sounds smart from a distance. Maybe he meant TWO four-seat Cessnas. No, wait, that would still be less weight.

      • 0 avatar
        TonyJZX

        He OBVIOUSLY means a Cessna Citation.

        What the hell is a Pulitzer Prize winner doing in a 172?

        seriously folks… let’s have some reality

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        A Cessna 310, which depending on its configuration could be a 4 seater, has an MTOW of 5500 lbs in heaviest form.

        The heaviest 4 seat single is the 400TT Corvalis at 3600 lbs MTOW.

        The lightest Citation, the 510 Mustang, has an MTOW of 8600 lbs. It seats 4 passengers in the cabin, plus two in the cockpit (although it can be flown single pilot).

      • 0 avatar
        Robert.Walter

        Two 152’s chained together in a Mistrel configuration also have 4 seats.

  • avatar
    TonyJZX

    it astounds me that Fisker can release a luxury car that is supposed to be a technical marvel with such a strange ICE/hvac system

    SURELY you could contract this out to a single HMI expert and get this sorted

    i don’t get how it gets this far

  • avatar
    TonyJZX

    Ok i’m watching his general review… there’s nothing right about this car

    5,000lb?

    the awesome awesome AWESOME build quality

    seriously i haven’t seen panel gaps like that outside of a Hummer (i mean a real one… that’s been dropped out of C-130…)

    and $100k+

    this is a joke…

  • avatar
    "scarey"

    Autootive journalism is the only kind of journalism we have left.

  • avatar

    I have to give this guy credit – I don’t normally like watching online videos, but he held my interest for the entire 41 minutes. Maybe this is because I’m genuinely interested in user interface design, but he’s also a really top-notch, engaging presenter.

    It’s such a smooth presentation I wonder how much time he put into it. A LOT is my guess.

    D

    • 0 avatar
      TonyJZX

      its actually very watchable

      the guy presenting is comfortable in his role and he has passion for what he’s describing… there no lull or flat spots… one make take that as an indictment how much is wrong

      i find it strange how this doesn’t strike the ire of La Hood and ‘distracted driving’

      how man interfaces with machine is integral to your experience with a product

      how Beiber and De Caprio put up with this i’ll never know

  • avatar
    hgrunt

    How many user reviews are this comprehensive? Not many.

    There’s some semi-professional car reviews on youtube I enjoy, like Everyday Driver (I think), who review cars I might actually buy some day, like a used M3. Well shot, witty back-and-forth banter between the two hosts, but not replacing fully blown reviews like Edmunds or Insideline any time soon.

    About the touch-screen approach on the Fisker seems like a cost cutting measure. It’s a rather inappropriate place to do it, if you ask me, especially since that’s how you do everything in the car.

  • avatar
    JaySeis

    Auto journalism is dead, sorta drifted off years ago to be replaced by the evolutionary dead end vacuous rantings of what is best described as car hacking, a perverse form of entetainment by the tidy whitey set. Owner reviews? Now that is hot and truth telling.

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    two problems with owner reviews – first up, I have no idea what perspective this person is coming from or if we’ll see eye to eye on things. I have no idea if they know what they’re talking about. Many people find the VQ37 grating, rough, and unnecessarily noisy. Personally, I think it has character and I like it. I know what MK, JB, Bertell, Alex, DK et al all look for and what they appreciate in cars, and base on past experiences, where I’m likely to agree and disagree, so I know how much weight to give their opinions. Also, they have the benefit of comparing cars since they drive most all of them. An owner may not have cross shopped and driven the competition, and therefore be able to compare it to other cars, within a category, or even across categories that may not always be cross shopped.

    I’ll add that one advantage you guys have over a traditional rag is level of interaction with your readers. I’ve always appreciated that when I comment on, or ask a question about a review and address the reviewer, I almost always get a response and its usually within 24 hours. If further clarification is needed, it’s usually provided. When I would write in to C/D or R&T, it was 3 months before I saw my letter published or responded too.

  • avatar
    Alexdi

    What’s the point of the writing? I struggled with this when I was putting together what turned out to be my sole TTAC review. On the one hand, you’ve got interesting, vibrant content where the author tries to capture the soul of the vehicle and put it in a larger context. And then you’ve got Consumer Reports, which lists all the things you’d actually care about day to day.

    Put another way, are you writing for the enthusiast or the buyer? There’s a market for both and no single review will be all things to all people. It’s just a matter of who you care to placate.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    Do you guys ever watch Brian Cooley’s Car Tech reviews on CNET? This is basically what he does with most cars on the market, albeit in a short, 5-7 minute form. He’s not really what I’d call an automotive journalist and I wouldn’t recommend watching his reviews for info on performance, but I don’t think anybody does infotainment system reviews better than he does.

    Incidentally, his most recent review covers the Aston Vantage which he absolutely ripped to shreds, one of the most negative reviews I’ve seen him do in quite awhile.

    http://cnettv.cnet.com/james-bond-would-never-drive-aston-martin-vantage/9742-1_53-50124836.html

  • avatar
    redav

    Behind the curve – this already happens. It’s called forums. I visit them when shopping for a new car, and they are an ample source of real-world, real-driver issues.

  • avatar
    slance66

    I think TTAC captures this already in some ways, through the comments. Unlike Motor Trend, or Neil’s video, when someone at TTAC reviews a car, real people add information via the comments. It can provide validation or an instant counter-point to the review. It even allows a prospective buyer to ask questions of the reviewer. Not only that, but “take two” reviews are fairly common here, showing stylistic differences. What I learn about a car from Michael is different than what I learn from Jack (to use the two most different reviewers).

    I think video reviews have a place, but on the whole they are less interactive and informative than what is available here. TTAC could, as a service, serve as a filtering point for the good videos like this one, thus driving traffic here. You could add a third party video section to the site to save people the trouble of sorting through the garbage on YouTube.

  • avatar
    nrd515

    I’ve had a couple of car stereos over the last 10 years or so that were really annoying to use, to put it mildly. One had a totally confusing menu system that took about 15 presses to get to a simple bass/treble adjustment! Another one locked up constantly, losing all the settings. It took at least 45 minutes to set it up again. It might last 20 minutes more, or two weeks before it locked up again. It turned out the unit was amazingly sensitive to any voltage variation. A big cap lessened the frequency of the lockups, but never resolved it.

    None of the aggravations of these stereos comes close to the setup in the video. The integration of the climate control into the stereo display makes any cure for the problems pretty much impossible.

  • avatar
    SLLTTAC

    I work for a company that designs custom interfaces for electronic systems. Brian Greenstone’s analysis is superbly done and a model to be emulated.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ToolGuy: JimZ, You’re not serious, but trade Jim Hackett for Elon Musk (keep Gwynne Shotwell) and see if...
  • Art Vandelay: They didn’t cost extra either
  • ToolGuy: …which is why I’ve left two OEM’s so far. And come to think of it, maybe why my kids...
  • ToolGuy: Some really old guys with broken wrists, arms and jaws might disagree with you – kidding. But if you...
  • Lorenzo: My first long drive was when I picked up my car in Providence RI and drove it to my Navy base in San Diego....

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States