[Bonzo]

We all heard about the reporters out in Oregon a while back, and knew they we're riding/driving in preproduction models from the pictures we saw. All the pictures I've seen in the magazine reviews so far are of those pre-production cars (the GM chicklet is on the door).

Have I missed it, or have none of the magazines bothered to mention this fact? I wonder why, because it could/might be relevant.

Now these cars are probably very close to production, and may be exactly the same as production, but I think failing to mention that they ARE preproduction is a little odd. I wonder if GM told them?

I suppose GM hand picked these particular cars just in case, which won't necessarily be the case in later reviews, so the tests should have been fairly accurate. Except for maybe Automobile's test data on gear speed, which is an obvious typo of some sort.

 

[mcronec5]

The little GM symbol is on all 06 models, this doesn't mean that it is pre-production.

 

[mcbman]

The little GM symbol is on all 06 models, this doesn't mean that it is pre-production.

GM Symbol on door = Pre-Production
GM Symbol on fender = Production

 

[Bonzo]

GM Symbol on door = Pre-Production
GM Symbol on fender = Production

Thank you sir.

 

[Fformula88]

Usually the magazines do point out that they tested pre-production cars. I know at least one of the reviews I read did mention this, because they heard some driveline noise and mentioned the GM engineers were hoping to have that worked out on production cars. I forget which review it was now.

 

[druid-2]

your chicklet

I have been informed by an ex GM employee that the chicklet is going to be standard on all GM products

so they may not be pre-prod's

 

[mcbman]

I have been informed by an ex GM employee that the chicklet is going to be standard on all GM products

so they may not be pre-prod's

Like I said:

GM Symbol on door = Pre-Production
GM Symbol on fender = Production

 

[Bonzo]

As I have said, and mcbman has confirmed, all the test cars in the magazine articles (I've seen) so far have been pre-production models (the chicklet on the door = preproduction, chicklet on the fender = production). This holds true with prior threads from Oregon Solstice about the cars in Oregon.

So now back to my real point, magazines do usually note when the car they are driving is pre-production. Why did all these magazines not say anything? Did they not know?

And, does anyone think GM should have made special mention of that so people don't get any negative feelings from their "first read" review that it was about a pre-production car?

I'm sure when head to head (Miata etc) reviews come out it will be a production car. Will it make a difference? Probably not, but maybe?

I just find it odd that no one on this forum has found it to be an obvious omision from all these articles. Whether it's a glaring one has yet to be seen I guess.

 

[mceb]

I think pre-production cars were exactly what production cars would be so there is no difference worth noting. Probably the only issue was the front fit gaps and GM probably told them it would be fixed for real production.

 

[achieftain]

Anything prior to official release of a car is preproduction and I'm sure the mags know that whether they chosose to relay that info is immaterial as long as they do further testing with production models. Handpicking cars for the mags to test is also nothing new. The manufacturers supply the cars for testing, the only time the mag goes down to the loal dealer and themselves select a unit is for a long-term (12 month) test. They don't just pull the next unit off the line and hand it over to a mag without making sure that the car performs at least as well as the manufacturer has already stated.

Interesting differences in test procedures certainly start to show up between the mags. Automobile seems to be the first to achieve the .9g lateral acceleration and actually hit .92, while everyone else was .88 at best. If I were Pontiac I would be frantically changing all instances of rpresentation of g's to the higher Automobile Magazine figure. They can always reference the source in really small fine print.

 

[achieftain]

As I have said, and mcbman has confirmed, all the test cars in the magazine articles (I've seen) so far have been pre-production models (the chicklet on the door = preproduction, chicklet on the fender = production). This holds true with prior threads from Oregon Solstice about the cars in Oregon.

So now back to my real point, magazines do usually note when the car they are driving is pre-production. Why did all these magazines not say anything? Did they not know?

And, does anyone think GM should have made special mention of that so people don't get any negative feelings from their "first read" review that it was about a pre-production car?

I'm sure when head to head (Miata etc) reviews come out it will be a production car. Will it make a difference? Probably not, but maybe?

I just find it odd that no one on this forum has found it to be an obvious omision from all these articles. Whether it's a glaring one has yet to be seen I guess.

The '06 Miata MSM was not publically released until 9/1 so all those test should be referencing "preproduction" as well?

 

[Oregonian]

When they were in Portland a couple of weeks ago, we stopped by and that is when I got to drive one. (Yahoo!!) Took a picture of the black one I drove, and emblems are on the front panel, not door.

 

[dori-san]

Usually the magazines do point out that they tested pre-production cars. I know at least one of the reviews I read did mention this, because they heard some driveline noise and mentioned the GM engineers were hoping to have that worked out on production cars. I forget which review it was now.

C&D. First paragraph, page two.

 

[Bonzo]

When they were in Portland a couple of weeks ago, we stopped by and that is when I got to drive one. (Yahoo!!) Took a picture of the black one I drove, and emblems are on the front panel, not door.

The cars driven in the reviews you see are from farther back in time. I don't remember exactly when, and I'm not going to take any time to find it, but it was back in Mid July I think. They were for long term (long lead time) print publications. The cars you saw were the "second go around", for short term press release like newspapers etc.

 

[Bonzo]

The '06 Miata MSM was not publically released until 9/1 so all those test should be referencing "preproduction" as well?

If they were preproduction cars then, yes, I think it should at least be noted. For example, what if the reviewers found some major flaw that they made a huge issue about in the first magazine. If they didn't say something like "but this is a proproduction cars and Mazda / Pontiac says that it is already fixed for true production cars", then many people reading the magazine may have a negative attitude towards that car. It may take 3-6 months (or more) before they review a true production car. In that time there is a lot of hear say and exagerations going on between car lovers, which may (or may not) effect sales and the publics general opinion about a car. Or it may delay sales until that second review comes out officially saying the issue got fixed.

I see this issue all the time in my Stereo magazines where they review components that have software issues. If they don't say something about it being pre-production or the manufacturer is aware of the issue and it is being fixed, then I guarentee that effects sales of the unit.

 

[Bonzo]

Anything prior to official release of a car is preproduction and I'm sure the mags know that whether they chosose to relay that info is immaterial as long as they do further testing with production models.

I don't think it's immaterial. See my post above.

Handpicking cars for the mags to test is also nothing new. The manufacturers supply the cars for testing, the only time the mag goes down to the loal dealer and themselves select a unit is for a long-term (12 month) test. They don't just pull the next unit off the line and hand it over to a mag without making sure that the car performs at least as well as the manufacturer has already stated.

True. But the 12 month test is not the only time. Sometimes it depends on the car. High end cars like Lamborghini's and Ferrari's are not always tested over there with factory picked cars. Sometimes they are publically owned cars.

Another time is when companies like (for example) Ford are releasing a car like the Ford 500 or something (not saying this car in particular, just using it as an example.) They don't always do it like they did with the Solstice. On the contrary, they hire an auto broker to take care of the publicity stuff for them. They hand money over to the broker who in turn goes and buys the Ford's car's compitition. They buy 10 Camery's, 10 G6's, 10 Accord's, etc etc. Then the broker takes care of getting 1 each of all the cars (including the Ford 500 which IS probably hand picked) to several testing destinations for magazines and test shops etc.

So in other words, all cars are not hand picked all the time, just a lot of the time.

 

[Fformula88]

C&D. First paragraph, page two.

:glol: Do you have the text memorized yet? :jester:

Thanks!

 

[Oregonian]

The cars driven in the reviews you see are from farther back in time. I don't remember exactly when, and I'm not going to take any time to find it, but it was back in Mid July I think. They were for long term (long lead time) print publications. The cars you saw were the "second go around", for short term press release like newspapers etc.

Yep! That's what I get for putting in my two cents worth.!! (looked at both pictures we took from first time here and second time here and saw the difference)...won't happen again!!....signing off..... :leaving:

 

[Bonzo]

:glol: Do you have the text memorized yet? :jester:

Thanks!

I do from the Automobile review, page #5. "This is the Pontiac that thinks it's a Porsche."

Enough said think I do. (this green smily face was the closest thing on here to Yoda)

 

[dori-san]

:glol: Do you have the text memorized yet? :jester:

Thanks!

haha! No. But when you said it I did remember reading it, and I had read the R&T just an hour or two before and knew it wasn't in that one. So I went back to C&D to check if it was that one, and sure enough... there it was: Page two, paragraph one.