Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors

Subject: Ferrari Long-Term Car
From: N. Kimpel

A $200,000+ exotic car for your long-term test stable? I had to check my calendar to see if it was April 1st already! I look forward to reading about what it's like to live with such an automobile on a day-to-day basis. Were the Edmunds editors to grow weary of living with the car, I'd be delighted to forward my résumé!


Subject: Edmunds' well being
From: A. Nopanen

During the recent times of dot-com fallouts and general economic malaise, I've wondered how Edmunds.com is weathering the storm. The fact that you provide so much excellent information for free with few obvious revenue sources has made me wonder how you manage to stay in business and whether you'd be sticking around.

Well, your update of 1st March has allayed my fears, what with the acquisition of your new long-term Ferrari! I theorize that this turn of events indicates one of the following situations:

(a) You are using Enron-esque accounting methods.
(b) You are having one last big party before the money runs out.
(c) Things are going just fine over at Edmunds.com.

I am hoping and assuming that (c) is the correct answer!

Anyhow, I hope you enjoy 2 years with your resident exotic; I will look forward to reading the monthly updates to see if a Maranello is a wiser purchase than, say, a new Civic.

Oh, yeah, one last question: Looking for a new editor?

Sure, but you'll need to step in line behind Mr. Kimpel — Ed.


Subject: Guess I'm still a car-nut
From: Ken

I enjoyed the reviews of the Ferrari and Maserati drool-mobiles (and also the extra-large photo of the 550). I'm suddenly reminded of the first time I picked up a sports car mag, about 40 years ago and read a colorful description of a cross-Europe road trip in a Maserati at often extreme — yet legal — speeds. This was heady stuff for a 12-year-old beginning to experience the first of two long-term loves (and no, the 2nd is not pizza). Thanks for the ride.


Subject: Integrity
From: B. Halverson

For a number of years I've read your print and online magazines with keen interest. I've always enjoyed your unique take on the car market and have applauded your valiant efforts to inform the consumer while not resorting to the pabulum of Motor Trend nor the crazy-aunt-Sally hysteria of Consumer Reports. However, I've discovered an alarming trend over the past year that leads me to believe your writers have begun to lose their nerve...

The real nail in the coffin is your latest long-term acquisition. Ah yes, the my-wallet-is-bigger-than-yours Ferrari 550 Maranello. Not only is this car not popular with consumers, it is not Ferrari's bread-and-butter vehicle, nor is it even a breakthrough given the introduction of the new 575 model. So what's the deal? Are you folks having a mid-life crisis? Should you test-drive Ferraris? Certainly, we all like to know how the top one-percent lives. But a long-term car? Not unless your readership consists exclusively of Lizzie Grubman and her set of socialite malcontents. Or perhaps worse, you've fallen into the same self-serving trap that typically renders "automotive" and "journalist" unutterable in the same sentence.

Most embarrassing for you is the fact that your writer let this $226,000 pile of guano off the hook after it left you stranded in a Los Angeles intersection. In years past, I've delighted in watching your editors take manufacturers to task for shoddy workmanship and poor reliability. I rejoiced as you wickedly tore apart a 1998 Seville because wet leaves left marks on the car's paint. I laughed as your editors detailed being stranded by your 1997 Isuzu Rodeo. I even chuckled when you, perhaps unfairly, complained about the electrical abnormalities that arose in your Jaguar Vanden Plas after it suffered $17,000 worth of repair damage. Now, however, you let this Viagra replacement off the hook after it craps out with only 108 miles on the odometer! Not only that, but you make light of the difficulty of having to drive the car "half-fixed" until a replacement part can be ferried over by Cleopatra's barge or some such nonsense.

How exactly did we "let it off the hook"? We reported on it, giving other potential buyers a heads-up on what can happen even after you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a car. Ferrari would obviously prefer we not detail such items in a long-term report, so your earlier statement about our losing our nerve isn't holding up. We've had to drive plenty of long-term cars "half fixed" and, again, I don't see how we "made light" of it. You mentioned our Jaguar Vanden Plas that always had some electrical affliction, as did our 1998 Seville. Then there was the PT Cruiser's steering column problem that the dealership needed four months to repair while we listened to it creak and rattle around every corner. Since it's a $23,000 domestic product, you certainly can't blame that one on an Egyptian queen's barge. And again, we reported on all of these problems just as we reported on the Ferrari's broken oil temperature gauge.

However, if you've really got a problem with the Prancing Horse, maybe you should check out the Ford Explorer that joined our fleet the same month as the Ferrari. Or you might enjoy reading about the Nissan Altima that came on board one month earlier. And if you can wait until May 1, we'll have a 2002 Audi A4 to keep you entertained. So even without the Ferrari, you've still got 11 cars and trucks to read about every month, most of them costing less than $30,000. To paraphrase a classic Lee Iacocca line, "If you can find more thorough long-term coverage of consumer product at another publication, read it!" — Ed.


Subject: Reliability Info
From: Lee

First of all, I want to tell you guys that I really enjoy and appreciate your site. Evidently, a lot of people allow their deep pride for our country to affect their decision-making process (I can hear the WWF's "Hacksaw" Jim Duggan chanting "USA! USA!" right now). Come on people, I'm as outraged as everyone else about the September 11th attack, but I'm not going to let that affect what brand of car I'm going to buy this summer.

And to demonstrate that I'm not on Edmunds' payroll, here is my main gripe. One area that I think the site is lacking in is reliability and maintenance reporting, especially long-term. I've seen where you defended yourself regarding the two-year ownership of the BMW 328i. Aside from initial problems, that doesn't tell us anything. We all know that the majority of problems occur after the car has a few years behind it and 50,000 miles (just in time for the warranty to run out). It should be no surprise to anyone how long manufacturers cover their cars. I think a great place for you to start researching reliability and predicted maintenance costs is the BMW 325i, Audi A4, Volkswagen Passat, Acura TL, and Nissan Maxima (what I'm currently considering).

I'm not communist, fascist, or a member of the Taliban. I just want to put my hopefully-soon-to-be-pregnant wife in the best car I can. Thanks for the great site.

We do offer reliability and recall information on our Ownership Page If you check the right side navigation you will see links to Maintenance Schedules, Manufacturer Recalls and Technical Service Bulletins. You can enter any vehicle make, model, year and mileage. We are also working on an official reliability rating system for the site that should be live soon.


Subject: Reliability versus Fun to drive
From: H

Your site is one of the best when it comes to presentation and useful information. But I am a little confused that you give some cars the best write up and recommend it to consumers without regards to their reliability history.

For example you wrote highly of the Volkswagen Passat, Jettas and Golf but the more research I do online regarding these cars the more I found out how unreliable and prone to mechanical and electrical breakdown they are. One web site has a mile long list of Jettas owners who swear never to buy the product again. I even spoke to a Volkswagen/Honda fleet manager and confirmed that Volkswagen service bays are non-stop all day long whereas the Honda service bays are minimal in activity.

I know the fun factor and road performance is important, but shouldn't you also factor in reliability history when recommending a purchase? After all, many consumers hang on to their cars for at least four years.

There's no doubt that reliability is a concern for consumers who purchase their vehicles and plan to keep them for long periods. After our two-year experience with a used long-term Volkswagen Passat, we would say that, while generally not regarded as reliable as Hondas, the reliability of newer (post 1998 models) is no worse than many other popular makes. — Ed.


Subject: Wardlaw's Altima Long-Term Update
From: F. Chartrand

I would like to offer a constructive criticism of Mr. Wardlaw's latest update on the 2002 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE. I was disappointed by the undeserved harshness of the article and frequent references to what amounts to minor quality control flaws (and yes, I am writing because I own a 3.5 SE). I certainly agree that the 3.5 is better for commuting than for long-distance touring, but not because of quality issues, rather because this car literally defines the go in stop-and-go, thanks to its great mechanical attributes.

Mr. Wardlaw refers to the stereo as "a pile of crap", which is quite a departure from all the praise he gave it in a November 27 article, in which he wrote, among other things, that the "system sounds nothing short of spectacular". In addition to being inconsistent with his initial praise, the latest critique of the sound system, or the "buzzing sound" and other "quality problems" he complains about, do not in any way compare to my personal experience. And I have owned the car for several months.

Without a doubt, your 3.5 tester suffers unusual problems (ever heard of a lemon?) that need to be fixed immediately, but they do not warrant generalized negative comments that reflect on all Altimas, most of which, like mine, are well assembled. Other less-than-brilliant complaints: the reference to four season 17-inch tires performing poorly in the snow (duh...) and the fact that one has difficulty carrying a conversation in the car at highway speeds (again, from personal experience, I can say this is completely false).

To conclude, I enjoy Edmunds.com, it offers valuable advice and info, but I think that reviews should be more balanced and, in the case of quality-control defects, greater emphasis should be put on the unusual character of the situation.


Subject: Escort History
From: EXPecting More.

How dare you! I cannot believe that you would take the time to write a history of the Ford Escort and absolutely fail to mention the only bright spot that has ever existed in the Escort lineup, the venerable Ford EXP. The EXP was as close to a sports car as one could get from Ford in the mid/late 80s since the Mustang was (and is) a ham-handed muscle car. With 2 seats, 4 cylinders, 5-on-the-floor and a good-looking design the EXP was one of the most fun-to-drive cars available from the big three during its tenure. You should be very ashamed and sent to bed without dinner!

The EXP was produced from 1982 to 1988. Although it shared its chassis with the Escort, Ford marketed it as a separate model, hence no mention of it in the "Escort" Generations piece. — John DiPietro


Subject: Family Car Test
From: Fred

First, let me say that I thoroughly enjoy your website. I'm a driver and engineer who frequently test-drives cars and trucks. Your reviews add much insight and valuable info.

I was surprised not to find the Honda Accord in this most recent test. I can't find any valid reason not to include it in the test. That said, I agree that the Passat is at or near the top. But I didn't purchase one, however, as I didn't like the need for premium fuel, and the interior is a bit small.

The Altima really is a worthy contender—I waited patiently hoping to purchase. The engine and styling as well as the promise of a real driver's car impressed the heck out of me! On a bright Saturday a few hours after unloading from the car carrier, I sat in one. The interior was a let down, big time.

I have a Toyota truck and love it. You could say I'm already a "Toyota guy." Well, first, let me say that the Camry is ugly. No two ways about it, this is one ugly-looking car. Sitting in it, I was not at all impressed with the interior, but I could get used to it. After driving it, I was impressed by the excellent 4-cylinder engine with 5-spd tranny. But, like the model it replaces, it is dull, boring, and just no fun to drive. I couldn't drive this thing on my daily commute if I want to stay awake and arrive alert.

That leaves the Honda Accord. Great interior — Nissan should take notes — and it feels more substantial as controls are worked, doors closed, etc. The styling is better than the Camry's. While it isn't as much fun to drive as the Passat, it isn't that far off the mark, and offers better interior space, better fuel economy (no premium fuel needed) and has a good reliability record. All this from an "older" design. I have to wish that Honda would consider a sport Accord sedan with one of their fine manual transmissions and higher output engines for a future model.

Well maybe leaving the Accord out of this recent test was to assure that the Accord didn't scoop up another win, as it did in the recent Car & Driver test of family sedans as well as making the '10-best list.' I had to purchase a 2002 Accord.

Yes, the Accord is an excellent family sedan. However, our policy concerning comparison tests is such: We take the winner of the previous comparison test and pit it against all-new models or those that have received significant updates. This explains the absence of the Honda Accord from the comparison, as it finished second in our 2000 Family Sedan Comparison Test and has received minimal changes since. — Ed.


Subject: Re: 2002 Family Sedan Comparo
From: B. Newberry

Hi Guys, first off let me say that I think very highly of your site including your editorials. Your habitual praise of the Miata helped me convince my wife that we needed one. Thanks

I believe that I understand your policy regarding selection of cars for your comparison tests. The family sedan segment surely has many more candidates than just the four you included (plus the Mopars that couldn't make it). I want to just point out one omission that I think is fairly unjust. Comparing a Camry SE to a Passat GLX is horribly unfair. The Camry is fair game for a Taurus or an Accord, obviously. The Passat GLX should, however, be matched against an Avalon. The Avalon XLS model can be purchased for less money than the GLX, but even the lowly XL soundly trounces those in your test other than the Passat. The GLX vs. XL outcome is tough to predict and would be decided subjectively.

So why wasn't the Avalon included? It was revised in 2000 and your roster of tests lists only the vehicle's road test. Perhaps the Avalon is the forgotten Toyota, but it's a pretty fine family car. A good number of Lexus owners ultimately buy down to it. Additionally, it seems to address all of the shortcomings charged against the Camry in your test, and it does so at a surprisingly modest price difference.

It should be obvious that I would like to see your comparison of the GLX to the XLS. Throw in the I35 just for fun. But the real message should be that by including the GLX in the group as you did, the winner was predetermined. The GLX out-costs and out-classes the others. At a minimum, you should have constrained yourselves to a GLS, Turbo, Automatic and arguably without the Leather pkg. That car is nowhere near the car that was tested, but better matches the others. This test lets your readers down guys.

For this comparison test, we felt that the majority of our readers would be cross-shopping the new Camry against the Passat. When we conduct a large sedan comparison test, we'd include cars like the Avalon, as well as the Buick LeSabre, Chrysler Concorde and Ford Crown Victoria. — Ed.


Subject: GREAT SITE
From: S. Hoffman

I really like your web site and I check it out almost every day for the latest reviews. I have a 2001 Hyundai Elantra and look forward to the beginning of the month when I can read the latest installment of your two-year drive test. I did shop around but always came back to this neat little car. Even though a lot of people thought I was stupid to consider a Korean car. It's unsafe! It's unreliable! No power!

Your two-year drive test vehicle is exactly the same as mine (the same color too) and I have about 18,000 miles on the clock and can also report not one problem with my car. It still drives really well and I enjoy the extra power. I have a long drive everyday and this car is almost the perfect A to B getter I've ever driven. Comfortable, easy to drive (the stick is so easy to shift!) and great visibility, all for less than $13,000!

Keep up the good work and be nice to that car!


Subject: bad headlines redux
From: Alan

I love you guys, and read your site every day. But two new articles have the word "redux" in the title. This means that you've used up your allotment for the year, and it's only March. Good luck when the A4 coupe and Porsche Cayenne come out.

Our managing editor reports that the next editor who uses "redux" in a story will get whacked on the head with a large thesaurus. — Ed.


Subject: Edmunds.com in general
From: HT Dang

I am an infrequent visitor to your website, however I've used your TMV pricings for purchases of both used and new vehicles. The dealers don't like it, but tough!

My main points for writing to you are: 1). To thank all of you for a job well done. 2). To say to BMW 3-series critics that they are only jealous because their marques can't make a vehicle that has the synergy of parts, mechanicals and emotions the BMW does it. 3). To ask those who are advocates of the ownership of American Big Three products whether or not Mexicans and Canadians are now considered to be Americans, since many domestic vehicles are made in these border countries.


Subject: True Off Road Category
From: S. Hill

Maybe this has already been suggested, but how about defining a new category called True Off Road (TOR)? This could be used to clarify the overused catchall of SUV. TOR could have parameters such as "ability to run the Rubicon trail" or "maximum ground clearance." This would be a fair way to compare such vehicles, such as Jeeps, Xterras and Land Rovers, without watering down the ratings with such things as on-pavement performance.

Anyway, thanks for such a great site!