![Bugatti Bird-gate Followup: Driver identity revealed <b>[*UPDATE:</b> Now with actual crash video!]](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/11/bugatti-veyron-swim-1258147199_143x85.jpg)
Car and Driver redesign hated by readers, and we agree
I first started subscribing to Car and Driver magazine sometime in 1981. I've maintained those subscriptions ever since. I've always appreciated the snappy writing, and even when I disagreed with the likes of Pat Bedard and Brock Yates in their columns, the quality of the content has almost always been top notch. Even when they featured Quicksilver Zimmer on the cover, I still enjoyed the magazine. I was particularly amused by the fact that Callaway Corvettes seemed to spontaneously turn their engines inside out whenever someone from CandD walked up to one in the mid to late '80s. The layout of the magazine never caused me any grief and never before did I have any problems finding information. But the recent total revamp of the magazine's layout left me sorely disappointed, and apparently many others agree. In the latest issue, the ever-present Ed. acknowledges in the Backfire section that of the readers who bothered to make their feelings known, they are opposed to the new look by a 164 to 13 margin. Sure, 177 responses isn't a huge sample, but that's still almost 93% of those who responded that don't like it. Despite that fact, Ed. says "...we paid big bucks for this redesign, and we ain't going back."
That's a pretty harsh comeback for a paying audience that's just being honest, especially considering that it seems like Motor Trend's been continually tweaking its layout for over a year now in order to arrive at a look that resonates with readers.
[Source: Winding Road]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Brian 3:38PM (1/29/2007)
I definitely liked the old layout better as well. I don't see why they thought they needed such drastic changes to begin with.
Reply
Jon Gaudu 3:44PM (1/29/2007)
How about an Autoblog poll of the new CandD? It sucks.
Reply
Brad \\\ 4:48PM (1/29/2007)
Count me among the haters. Give me simple tables and text boxes for the various specs, ratings, and test results. I know that they're going for the eye-catching graphics and all that, but the layout is so busy that it's not easy to find the info I'm looking for. The content is still good, and that's why I don't envision giving up my subscription, but I don't like the layout.
Reply
scopkins 3:45PM (1/29/2007)
I just noticed and honestly, not untill I saw an angry letter in Backfire. I think it's much ado about nothing, though a couple of us in the office wondered what content they axed because the magazine looks thinner. It's still top-notch writing and debate inducing comparisons and it's still a month out of date by time I read it thanks to online sources.
People get all out of whack when you change something. I was pissed when Jeep changed the classic Cherokee to the Liberty so I won't exclude myself, but... uhhh. Get over it vocal minority. If you can do that unlike the Liberty this is actually a good change.
Also note that the Editor said "we ain't goin' back". Leave 'em a little room to go forward. The old design wasn't that great.
Reply
fordman 3:48PM (1/29/2007)
Car and Driver owns Road and Track.
Road and Track has the absolute greatest tech and specification pages. This page is also available as pdf on their website.
If Car and Driver owns road and Track, why would they not just grab the same spec sheet? Use the same layout?
Reply
RITmusic2k 3:54PM (1/29/2007)
My first thought is that someone who doesn't mind the new layout will not likely be inclined to write in about their indifference to it. A publication with readership numbers in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, simply cannot be critiqued based on a poll of fewer than 200 people.
That said, I don't like what I've seen of the new layout either...
Reply
vectorbug 4:00PM (1/29/2007)
Look at the body roll on that mustang. Just look at it.
Reply
mopostal 4:27PM (1/29/2007)
How can anyone complain about a redesign to Car and Driver? The previous layout was clumsy and timid. If a magazine isn't dynamic to look at then why would you pick it up? You can already find timely information on the Internet, therefore, the magazine needs a new mission to stay alive. Give them some time to tweak this design, it will surely get better.
I think all the concern lies with the use of all caps for the article headlines and captions. The one area that definitely needed improvement was in the photography department, and in that regard it still has a ways to go. This new direction they are taking seems more tabloid in nature, but if their subscriber base is shrinking the only hope they have is the airport/supermarket crowd. In those situations there are a lot of other publications clamoring for attention, so I'd say it's a step in the right direction. In addition, American magazine design is mediocre at best, so any attempt to shake things up is greatly appreciated.
Reply
Puffyc 4:29PM (1/29/2007)
I've been a subscriber since the 80's as well and honestly I couldn't really tell much difference so I hope they didn't pay too much. If you can get past the 1950s-esque nonsensical rantings of Bedard and Yates then the car related content is actually quite good. Oh, and while I'm ripping on these guys, it's 2007 already so you can stop with the 'airbags are killers' editorials and nutjob theories on why global warming doesn't exist.
Reply
SSBR 4:28PM (1/29/2007)
Car and Driver has gotten very boring..
http://www.rolesor.com
Reply
SSBR 4:25PM (1/29/2007)
I agree.. I used to be a subscriber but cancelled them after my free 1 year sub ended.
http://www.rolesor.com
Reply
Tom Miller 4:36PM (1/29/2007)
I used to subscribe when it was Sports Cars Illustrated. After they changed the name, they got too cutesy so I didn't renew. Stayed with R&T and Motor Trend for years, but dropped MT 5 or 6 years ago. Recently resubscribed to MT after I noticed the monumental changes they made. AutoWeek is still one of my favorites.
Reply
rwdmtparkingonly 4:28PM (1/29/2007)
It's still worth subscibing too, if only because $12 a year is not even worth thinking about. Losing Yates was a big blow, but in the last couple months they covered Burning Man, the Sprint Car Nationals with Phillips in an Airstream pulled by an AMG M-Class, and raced in the 24 hours of LeMons. That's worth reading even though the new format sucks.
Reply
Aki 4:30PM (1/29/2007)
With Motortrend's utterly superior photgraphy, better coverage (albeit more dry), there's no reason to subscribe to C&D. I've resubscribed to Motortrend, but not C&D and R&T.
Reply
Brad 4:35PM (1/29/2007)
RE: vectorbug (#7)
"Look at the body roll on that mustang. Just look at it."
Look at Grand-Am Fresh from Florida 200 at Daytona this weekend: Mustangs qualified in six of the first 10 spots (including the pole) and went 1-2 with 4 of the top 10.
Mustangs own road racing!
Reply
jopferj 4:07AM (1/30/2007)
Winding road puts all the U.S. print rags to shame. And, it's free! Check it out sometime.
(FWIW, I have absolutely no connection to Winding Road, it's just a good product. Suspiciously free, but good.)
Reply
ljcabrera 4:49PM (1/29/2007)
Funny the change didn't affect me at all I still read it cover to cover.
Reply
Clinton 4:49PM (1/29/2007)
I don't have a problem with C&D's new look. I agree with #6; only the people that don't like it are going to complain.
#7
I thought the minimal body roll was impressive too.
Reply
Zo 5:49PM (1/29/2007)
Given the volumes of information available online, do we really need these magazines? Except to pass the time away at the doctors office is there any purpose to the info?
If these rags wanted to draw more eyes to the mag you would think that they would do more online.
Reply
dave 4:42PM (1/29/2007)
what would one expect with that arrogant answer. it's owned by the french.
Reply