HotRodW

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-drive-reviews

dejongj

Odd how this is marked September 2016, yet the photos are from the press release in March 2016. Sometimes I wonder whether journalist actually drive these cars or just make up a story based upon specifications. Still haven't seen a proper car journalist review of that car.

Saying that, it is exactly (minus the side steps and those seats as they aren't available in the UK) how I've configured mine that is on order; build date 10/13/2016

speedeye

Driving reviews were probably embargoed by MB until October 1st. As I recall, the US dealer order guide listed the launch month for GLC43 as October. Nothing discouraging about the review or performance estimates.

BTW, my SA told me on 9/26 that my US-spec GLC43 is built but not shipped.

dejongj

I doubt it, the "reviews" have been out and all the same since this was announced back in March. It comes across like an opinion piece more than anything else with the same old photographs.

I really don't understand this artificial launch month business in the US. Haven't they heard of the internet

It will be good to get some actual reviews in. My dealer only sold one other GLC43 besides my one. I bet loads more will be sold once some proper reviews will start to come in. It was the same with my Golf R - I ordered unseen but once the reviews came in everyone and their dog got one.

What spec did you order your GLC43 in? Mine is Obsidian Black, 21" Black AMG wheels, the Premium Plus pack which is basically nearly everything bar safety features including the Burmester upgrade and Panoramic Sunroof. Then I've also added Remote Online and the Intelligent Light System to it.

Or easier to say, the only options I didn't tick was all the safety aids, the side steps (it is so low as it is), and the 360 Camera (got it on our GL but the GLC is so much smaller I thought it was pointless as I barely ever use it on the GL).

HotRodW

Sure they drive them. MB probably hosted a media event for print and online journalists to sample the cars, but made the drives conditional upon an agreement to keep the information under wraps until a specified date, or 'embargoed' as Speedeye posted. There will likely be a rash of first drive impressions over the next week or so.

dejongj

As I said, I don't get the US approach to this. Such an event was held back in March and every journalist published their initial impressions. 9 months later there is nothing new reported in there. To me it doesn't make any sense.

Case in point, looks at the photos as well;
http://www.evo.co.uk/mercedes/glc/17...join-amg-range
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/mo...matic-revealed
http://www.topspeed.com/cars/mercede...-ar172777.html
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/me...v6-105635.html
http://m.australiancar.reviews/revie...l=GLC&gen=1536
http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/m...16-gnl0er.html
http://www.caranddriverr.com/2016/03...urbos-362.html (this one even calls it a 2018 model WTF, clickbait or what?)
http://www.automobileglobe.com/2016-...4matic-review/

HotRodW

If the U.S. media were permitted to post a full review, they would have. It's how they make money after all. In most cases European models are released here after they're launched in the home market. It makes sense that MB would want to keep details limited that far ahead of the official launch.

dejongj

Hmmm - I don't agree, as I demonstrated it isn't a full review, it is just more of the same of where the global press was invited when it was launched back in March. Perhaps I'm a little bit more of a cynic but it is just more of a rehashed opinion piece of what was already delivered before. And that is how they truly make money through online clicks. Just like the jokers linked to above with a 2018 model. It is just the same old photos and the same old information.

Not that I mind, but lets not kid ourselves.

So what did you order then?

HotRodW

Car and Driver doesn't do full reviews until they are permitted to do performance testing on production models, which is exactly how it should be. They used MB-supplied photos, just like the European media, probably because they had to. It is very possible MB didn't permit photos during this particular event.

dejongj

LOL Have you got shares in caranddriver or something? There are plenty of production models out, heck if they've driven one recently in Germany than that would be a production model

So what did you order then?

HotRodW

I've been a subscriber for about 30 years, so I just know how it works. There are no U.S. spec GLC 43 production models on the roads here. When/if Car and Driver publishes a formal full road test review, it will be an American market model with American market options, tested on our beat up American roads and burning American grade fuel. Again, as it should be.

I didn't order anything. My wife ordered a well equipped 2.0T.

dejongj

I think we have a communication issue or something Yes I know it isn't out in the USA, but the world is a lot bigger than the US. It doesn't centre around the US All I'm saying is that they publish that article in September with photos from March, and no new information in it. I don't like that kind of journalism, but hey if you subscribed to that and think that is ok for over thirty years then we just have a very different outlook on what good journalism is. As it should be ...

Sometimes it really doesn't

HotRodW

No communication issue - just your inability to apply logic and reason. You're accusing one of our most respected automotive media outlets of faking a review because they used the same official photos all the European and Australian websites used. It doesnt make sense.

You seem determined to make this about something other than the GLC, but I'm not biting. If you have a problem with the United States, maybe your time would be better spent on a political forum.

ec_nova

dejognj is 100% correct. this isn't a "review" this is a summary. All of their times were estimated, and they gave ZERO new information. They simply stated what the car has. The entire article is nothing but click bait. And I'm sorry, Car and Driver is far from "most respective" but is simply "most recognized" and there is a HUGE difference. They are notorious for incorrect and biased information.

Why are people so offended by C&D being called out? If I had been a subscriber for 30 years I would be outraged that the would stoop to such poor tactics just to get some clicks.

clarst

That's a straw man--no one is claiming or thinking anything "centers" around the US.

Car and Driver is a US magazine catering to the US market, plain and simple.

HotRodW

So you're suggesting they shouldn't report anything unless they can put the car on the track?

Car and Driver has four basic types of reviews: first drives, full road test reviews, comparison tests and long term tests. The latter three include instrumented testing, full specifications, and positive and negative conclusions. First drives such as the one posted here do not include any instrumented testing -- usually because the manufacturer doesn't permit it. The limited information is usually based on a brief drive at a manufacturer sponsored event. It's the reason such events are held. To my knowledge, nobody has been allowed to do instrumented testing of the GLC43, and yet there has been plenty of online coverage. In short, such events are effective at creating pre-launch buzz.

Not that it matters, but I am not offended by any criticism of Car and Driver. As a C/D forum member, I have levied plenty of criticism toward their editorial staff myself. I just don't see what the issue is here. Had I realized posting a simple review link would create so much controversy, I wouldn't have bothered. Rest assured it won't happen again.

ec_nova

no, I'm suggesting they shouldn't call it a REVIEW unless they REVIEW a vehicle. They simply read about it, then wrote about what they read about. They even call it a "first drive" when they never even drove the vehicle.

It's simple. They're making this article now, early, so people trying to get info about the vehicle click on their link when they google it, thinking they will read about somebody's road test afterthoughts. This generates revenue for them, even though they have provided ZERO new information for consumers. It's a pathetic attempt to make money and if I was a reader I would definitely cancel my subscription. They clearly care more about money than providing quality information to their subscriber base. Little do they realize, quality reviews/writing will give a larger base and more trust.

I, personally, would rather WAIT for a quality/unbiased/thorough review than simply read the first one there is. To each his own, I guess? I am a firm believer that facts trump loyalty.

HotRodW

They drove the car. I'm sure it was at a media event along with dozens of others, where they got wined and dined in hopes of ensuring a good report, but I have no doubt they drove the car.

I would love to know what makes you think they're lying to millions of readers. On second thought, no ... I wouldn't. I just don't care that much.

ec_nova

so you're telling me they actually drove this vehicle, and the ONLY thing they said about the drive was that it was "solid and capable" and "plush" then decided instead of describing more of the driving experience, they talk about the cabin, the roofline, the heritage, yada yada. I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying it.

Can't wait for their review next week on the 2018 AMG GTR! I hope the exhaust is throaty and steering has great feedback

clarst

Thanks for posting it--I recognized the First Drive Review for what it was and enjoyed it.

There is an obviously synergistic relationship between car manufacturers and the "big three" car magazines in the United States, which I think is unique. Both sides adhere to a pretty strict set of guidelines/agreements regarding what news can be released and when.

As explained by HotRodW above, a C&D full review involves getting a production car and putting it through its full paces. A "First Drive Review" involves some specs and subjective impressions, not hard data. It's a bit of a teaser/introduction to a new vehicle and what to expect. The vehicle may be later fleshed out in a full review. Whether or not one finds the First Drive Review interesting or useful is up to the individual, but to complain vociferously about what a First Drive Review is not is rather silly IMHO.

dejongj

Thanks @ec_nova you absolutely got what I meant. Too many "journalists" do this nowadays.

Look it isn't the article that causes controversy, its not seeing it for what it is that caused the debate. The total lack of new information in, the use of 6 month old photos etc. I don't like that kind of rehash "journalism" that is all.

dejongj

110% my point! I don't get this defensive behaviour on behalf of a company whose objective is too sell as much as they can. I've bought C&D over the years on and off, can't say it is generally for me and stunts like these just confirm my position.There are a number of European magazines who do that as well, most annoying as they just rehash each others stories or present an opinion piece as a first drive first impression based upon a clever rewrite of the official press release.

HotRodW

Car and Driver Instrumented Test

MotorAuthority First Drive

dejongj

That is a little better; both articles are (to me) strangly similar with very little driving information. But a lot more informative that the original one in my opinion.

Now I've got some miles on my GLC43 AMG I've really opened it up, and when pushing it you can really notice the real wheel bias. It handles lovely and the sound is absolutely superb. Very dangerous for points on anyones driving license as it just keeps on pulling and accelerating.

clarst

Very nice, thanks!