Housekeeping: We Want Your Feedback
Hey there! As you know, TTAC looks a bit different than it did last week. And operates a bit differently, as well.
Well, it's been a week now, and we'd like to hear feedback from you, the reader, on what is and what isn't working.
I have been monitoring the comments, and I've read your emails (and replied, if necessary. If I owe you a reply, feel free to ping me again). But it will be easier if we can round up feedback in the comments to this post.
Please keep your grievances realistic and focus on things that aren't working or we could easily change. Meaning complaints about user experience, or bugs, or functionality. Complaints about aesthetics are irrelevant to this conversation, as are complaints about topic mix or tone or the quality of our prose. Save those for another time.
We are aware of some things that aren't working or aren't working well, and those things will be fixed in short order.
Please keep in mind that the impetus behind the change wasn't just that the old site looked, well, old, but also that it was quite slow to load. It was like an '80s crapcan -- ran great for a long time but started looking dated and running slowly.
As our VP of Content, Colum Wood, puts it: "While the front end of the site may not look dramatically new, the back end changes are dramatic. As you may know, Google puts a lot of weight on site speed and a few other key metrics. Achieving those metrics is critical to having a high-ranking site and top-performing content. With the migration to this new platform we've been able to eliminate a lot of tech debt built up over years and score extremely highly in all key measured metrics from Google."
In other words, we'll be running more quickly once this is all sorted. That's good for you -- the site will load on your laptop, tablet, or phone more quickly. And it's good for us -- we'll traffic a bit better, and us writers and editors will be more productive when the site loads faster.
But as always when there is a major change, we've run into unanticipated challenges. Most of those should be handled this week.
That said, we also want to hear from you. Sound off below!
[Image: Sorn340 Studio Images/Shutterstock.com]
Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.
Join the conversation
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- 56m65711446 Well, I had a suburban auto repair shop in those days.
- Dukeisduke Yikes - reading the recall info from NHTSA, this sounds like the Hyundai/Kia 2.4l Theta II "engine fire" recall, since it involves an engine block or oil pan "breach", so basically, throwing a rod:"Description of the Safety Risk : Engine oil and/or fuel vapor that accumulates near a sufficiently hot surface, below the combustion initiation flame speed, may ignite resulting in an under hood fire, and increasing the risk of injury. Description of the Cause :Isolated engine manufacturing issues have resulted in 2.5L HEV/PHEV engine failures involving engine block or oil pan breach. In the event of an engine block or oil pan breach, the HEV/PHEV system continues to propel the vehicle allowing the customer to continue to drive the vehicle. As the customer continues to drive after a block breach, oil and/or fuel vapor continues to be expelled and accumulates near ignition sources, primarily expected to be the exhaust system. Identification of Any Warning that can Occur :Engine failure is expected to produce loud noises (example: metal-to-metal clank) audible to the vehicle’s occupants. An engine failure will also result in a reduction in engine torque. In Owner Letters mailed to customers, Ford will advise customers to safely park and shut off the engine as promptly as possible upon hearing unexpected engine noises, after experiencing an unexpected torque reduction, or if smoke is observed emanating from the engine compartment."
- Dukeisduke In an ideal world, cars would be inspected in the way the MoT in the UK does it, or the TÜV in Germany. But realistically, a lot of people can't afford to keep their cars to such a high standard since they need them for work, and widespread public transit isn't a thing here.I would like the inspections to stick around (I've lived in Texas all my life, and annual inspections have always been a thing), but there's so much cheating going on (and more and more people don't bother to get their cars inspected or registration renewed), so without rigorous enforcement (which is basically a cop noticing your windshield sticker is out of date, or pulling you over for an equipment violation), there's no real point anymore.
- Zipper69 Arriving in Florida from Europe and finding ZERO inspection procedures I envisioned roads crawling with wrecks held together with baling wire, duct tape and prayer.Such proved NOT to be the case, plenty of 20-30 year old cars and trucks around but clearly "unsafe at any speed" vehicles are few and far between.Could this be because the median age here is 95, so a lot of low mileage vehicles keep entering the market as the owners expire?
- Zipper69 At the heart of GM’s resistance to improving the safety of its fuel systems was a cost benefit analysis done by Edward Ivey which concluded that it was not cost effective for GM to spend more than $2.20 per vehicle to prevent a fire death. When deposed about his cost benefit analysis, Mr. Ivey was asked whether he could identify a more hazardous location for the fuel tank on a GM pickup than outside the frame. Mr. Ivey responded, “Well yes…You could put in on the front bumper.”
every time i go to the site it shuts down after a few seconds and goes to my home page. Upon the second time of loading TTAC it stays on the site. This happens every time. Never did that before but unsure if maybe its me?
The function of the return key seems to be changing from week to week - i.e., 'do we allow commenters to use paragraphs or do we restrict them to pithy one-liners.'
The current iteration (Aug 21) is Wrong because a single return gets you a paragraph (which takes up *more* vertical space). [You're still doing it wrong]