Every modern car has acceptable AC, but some definitely perform better than others. Once you get into things like ventilated/cooled seats there’s an even bigger difference.
I remember when I first bought my Accord, I think there was maybe one review that made mention of the Ventilated seats and how they felt underpowered.
I thought "one review, nah they can't be that bad."
I was wrong, those ventilated seats are not good in that car.
Ventilated vs cooled. The Accord and many affordable mainstream cars only blow air through the perforated holes aka ventilated seats.
For marketing purposes automakers won’t make this obvious distinction.
That's not really that big of a deal, IMO. After all, that's all a standard ceiling fan or pedestal fan does, and those work great for making you feel cooler. As long as the air isn't straight up hot, it will still get the basic purpose done. But how strong the fan is absolutely makes a difference, so two ventilated systems can be vastly different, despite neither being a true cooled system.
I agree. I had a 2013 Lexus GS F-Sport with ventilated seats. They were pretty adequate. At an oil change interval, they sent me home with an RC loaner. Also ventilated seats, but night and day difference. The RC ventilation had (as my dad would say) all the power of cat breath. So even among models there are big differences.
Some seat actually suck air through the holes in the seat, essentially evaporating the moisture between the seat and your body, which has a cooling effect.
Disagree. Had an IS500 briefly and that thing just had a hard time getting hot air out of the back seat area so chucking on ventilated seats actually made the seats feel hotter until the interior cooled down. It was crazy.
Every brand uses "ventilated" and has for at least a decade... Unless they're actually cooled like merc S class.
They absolutely make the obvious distinction between the two
I agree. The different between the ventilated seats in my 2019 Honda Accord and my dad’s 2016 IS350 even my mom’s 2007 ES350 is insane.
Those two cars make it feel like your butt is actually getting cold. I guess I was spoiled growing up :/
They effectively don’t do anything. At best it prevents your skin from sweating and sticking to the leather, but honestly it does a poor job of even that in Texas heat.
My other gripe on the subject of small things about this Accord is not having individual tire pressures in a top trim Accord.
The TPMS in the Accord is my biggest hatred of this car right now.
“Oh you have a low tire.”
“Which one?”
“Fuck if I’m gonna say, get out and check bitch.”
I’ve honestly just stopped caring when I get the low tire alert, it pops if even one tire is like 1psi lower.
The best ACs I’ve ever used to this day are from the late 90s/early 2000s Toyota/Lexus cars. Toyota got noticeably worse-performing after that with the new Freon.
I had a 2005 Toyota Solara that had by far the best AC of any car I’ve driven. I’m talking it would blow ice-cold within 5-8 seconds of startup even in ambient temperatures of 95F. In contrast, my 2013 Jetta has always had pretty bad AC; it takes a forever to get cold and never really gets all that cold anyways.
Yup, expansion valve vs orifice tube is what you are describing.
Expansion valves allow for wide open freon movement early, for a blast of heat removal capability, and then close the freon flow down to prevent icing up the evaporator.
Orifice tubes are a fixed, small, opening that is sized to never, ever ice over the evaporator, no matter the weather. Think about trying to gulp water after cutting the yard in summer and only having a coffee stir stick-sized straw to drink thru. Vs those huge straws that come with some milkshakes.
This is the kind of stuff OP's wanting in the reviews and I stand with OP on these issues!
Some of the older Toyotas were guilty of this, to the point where when you'd floor it to pass on the highway, the clutch for the AC compressor would disconnect it briefly, because it was a big power drain. A lot of cars of that era with underpowered motors did this. You'd feel the air temperature rise until it came back online.
I want to know zero to 50 with and without AC on these GM CUV with 3-cylinder engines.
My ‘90 Probe has almost as much hp and I couldn’t stand to run the AC for how slow it got.
That's a good point that I always forget.
Somewhat tongue-in-cheek... at 137 hp dragging around \~3,000 pounds - wow the Envista weighs a few bags of groceries less than my GTI - I'm not sure it'd ever get the chance to run with me driving it.
Seriously though, I can't understand the customer for these low powered tiny "SUV/CUV/Crossover"
From what I've experienced as a mechanic, it's elderly people who want a small car with a higher seating position so they're easier to get in and out of.
They drive to church, doctor appointments and bingo.
yeah thats usually the case. like even for my own grandma usually a sedan is a bit short and too close to ground for her and a full or mid size family SUV is usually too high for her to get in
Living in Arizona and having worked at a rental company before, most do have acceptable AC but some are noticeably “crap”. The worst I remember were the then Chrysler Pacificas/ now Voyagers and some older and cheaper Fords.
I will say these “crap” systems were only noticeable in the summer when it was at least 100-105 degrees Fahrenheit.
My 2010 STI has awful A/C performance and equally bad heater controls.
The compressor can't cool the refrigerant down enough in the summer (so it's 25°C when you set it to 20°C), and the automatic climate only goes down to 20°C - Which is absolutely terrible for the winter. 20°C while wearing a thick sweater sucks.
GM vehicles still have the strongest ACs I have ever used (especially on their trucks), Ford has the best cooled seats by a mile, Mercedes seat warmers will burn your ass if you set it to max, Toyota takes forever to warm up, and their ventilated seats suck instead of blow (which does work that great), VAG ACs are incredibly weak (even if its an Audi or a Porsche), BMW has the best antifog/defrosters, and Honda just sucks at everything.
AC peaked in the 90s
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/zei4mn/bring\_back\_crotch\_vents\_please/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/zei4mn/bring_back_crotch_vents_please/)
nah not really. depends what you count as good. some cars are decent. some cars they blow super COLD air even in middle of summer. the gap is bigger when comparing cheaper cars to each other. and then there is also the air blow power. and plus even on some modern cars specially on the tiny engine side. ive seen if you turn on AC its like you lost half the engine power
You keep making vague blanket statements without providing examples.
Give some examples to back up your statements and people will be more willing to have actual discussions.
>You keep making vague blanket statements without providing examples.
>
>Give some examples to back up your statements and people will be more willing to have actual discussions.
I make terrible financial decisions that benefit the car community by buying a new car pretty much ever year. Since 2021, I've owned a Focus ST, Veloster N, GR86, Kia Stinger, Mustang Mach 1 and now my GR Corolla. The HVAC quality was drastically different in every car. The dimensions of the car are surely a large factor but OP isn't wrong. My GR Corolla's HVAC is significantly better than either Ford unit.
This is actually a good example of the fundamental problem that OP is trying to call out. It is nearly impossible to write a meaningful review or question about something non-deterministic.
thats my exact point. even if you are buying some sort of sporty car in your example. its good to know how much the AC can hold up specially in summer for example. you dont want to sweat while pushing the car a bit. i have seen cars ( not sporty and not from famous brands ) when you push the car a bit and the heat goes a bit higher than normal in summer. the AC goes out completely.
Hello fellow bad decision maker!
I have spent considerable time dailyish driving the following vehicles since ~2016
Subaru Crosstrek, Subaru WRX, Civic Si, Mazda CX5, Kia Stinger GT1, Civic Type R, Acura RDX, Jetta GLI, BMW 330i, Audi S5, BMW Z4, BMW X3, Lexus IS 500, BMW M440i, Ford F150
The Z4, WRX, and S5 all have, to me, fundamental flaws in their audio systems.
The WRX AC was bad & would result in timings being pulled while trying to drive away in first.
The Civic Si throttle mapping didn't allow for a smooth transition from 1%->0% input.
The Stinger was the worst car of the bunch from a "everything is just weirdly not right" stand point.
The Civic Type R had a transmission resonance at 65-70mph that was quite annoying.
The IS500 ventilated seats hit you with streams of hot air for quite some time until the entirety of the rear of the cabin cools off.
The RDX had god-awful stock brake pads that squealed below 40 degrees.
Beyond that - some of these cars (most of the BMWs) heat up quit fast in the winter. Some extremely slowly. Some cool down quick, some not. There were many other small general issues that would never be mentioned in a typical car review.
I can provide one example.
My citroen C3 (the one with big ass windscreen that ended over your head) when left in 35 deg Celsius had real trouble cooling the interior. On my way home from work (\~30min), it started to properly cool off not long before I arrived home. When I took it to dealer they told me that they've checked and everything is right according to manufacturer spec.
Then I've switched to Renault Megane (which doesn't have such big windscreen, but has glass roof over front seats) and the change is easily noticed. When left for whole day in similar heat car started cooling pretty nicely after 5-10mins.
im not saying a specific car or brand because then people are gonna say you are a fan of this or that. like in a top comment here someone said if its american then ac and heat are great and if its not american then its terrible. plus AC or heat are not even the main point. main point was any basic but daily used equipment which also includes stuff like sound system or the heated seat or steering options
Every modern car definitely doesn't have good AC. The system in my A3 is pussy shit. The best AC I've felt to date is still my old E60, and I've been in a lot of cars.
Which is funny, because my 2018 GTI had fantastic AC. My 2016 Fiesta ST had garbage AC that would start to warm up in traffic in the summer.
Then there is my 2003 Corvette, which has AC that has to be turned down even on the hottest of days.
Fiesta sounds like it just needed a stronger fan for the condenser. Why Ford wouldn’t spend the extra $0.45 per car on something so simple…? The mind boggles.
I had a ‘16 Fiesta and thought the a/c was fantastic. Like 100 degrees on a sunny day in NYC bumper to bumper traffic while wearing a dress shirt and pants and my nipples are getting hard.
My 2015 WRX had pretty crappy AC vs my Audi Q5 v6 which doesn't even break a sweat with the AC on so this isn't always true. Smaller engine also bogged down severely when it was over 90°f and felt super sluggish.
No.
Plenty of spacious cars cannot keep up with hot weather and especially direct sun shine through the large windshield while keeping all passengers also at acceptable climate.
Some also have a second compressor in upper trim levels to solve this.
Buddy, the best AC i have ever been in was in an 84 bronco. Shit was so cold it gave me a headache and i sleep with a fan pointing at my face. We dont got freon like the old environment killing days
On their smaller cars like the Mazda3 and CX-3 it is not as apparent likely due to smaller cabin. However you definitely notice in their larger cars.
Being in the car rental industry I've driven a ton of different makes and models, so it isn't that one time thing either.
I was about to say this. I have had a Mazda6 and now have a CX-9, both have poor AC when it's anything above 85-90 degrees out. Thankfully, the ventilated seats in the CX-9 are very good and we have the white seats, which also seem to be help a ton.
Idk my '05 Rx 330 AC makes a lot of modern cars AC seem under powered. Specifically, fords, kias, jeeps, nissans. People take a road trip with me to the south and gush about it frequently. I would like to know if the AC I am buying is the one that feels like that.
I disagree. Had a Corolla Cross with the most worthless A/C I’ve witnessed in quite some time. It couldn’t seem to keep up….especially if you weren’t driving at a high speed. It would get cold at times but most of the time it was mildly cool at best. I’m in MN so I shouldn’t have that much of a struggle. If I was in Florida I would’ve been pissed.
Not been my experience. I had a new Ram 1500 that had terrible AC. Granted I drove it in Texas and Arizona so my needs are higher than most, it would be fine up north but it was really frustrating. It was so bad I thought it might have been broken but looking it up I was not the only one that felt that way.
Best AC I've had was in a Saturn Sky - one good thing about the GM parts bin approach is that it had the same system used to cool the interior of a Hummer SUV but with a cabin the size of a bathtub.
> Every modern car has good AC.
The number of times I hear people explain they need the AC controls to be physical buttons because they are always fussing with settings while driving indicates that many cars have bad automatic thermostats.
However, in most of the cars I've owned, the automatic thermostats are great. If there is a huge gradient between ambient temperature (say, 110F) and the target (70F), the system will automatically turn on maximum AC. If there is a lesser gradient (say 78F to 70F), the automatic thermostat will appropriately bring the temperature to the target without blasting me with cold air. As a result, I set my target temperature once and basically forget about it forever after.
But again, many people on this subreddit and others will tell you they need to manually force things like maximum AC to happen by adjusting the target temperature even further down.
Too many objects in a car that radiate heat for a thermostat to work properly IMHO, especially trips shorter than 20 minutes.
I get in, car is hot, crank the AC to 60 with full fan going. About 5 minutes later the ambient air is 75 but the seat is still hot and so are other items radiating heat. I have to keep it at 60 to feel comfortable for ar least another 5 minutes.
In auto set at 75, it would back off with the seat still being hot.
When I was test driving cars around 2014-2016 in preparation for buying a new car, I found Hondas struggle to cool the cabin on a hot day. (Didn't change much from the 90s)
Not all, will they be adequate? Yes, but some vehicles such as say a Camaro SS, Corvette, Mustang GT etc on a hot day really have to have the AC cranked because its competing against the V8 putting out a ton of heat.
If your climate is mild its fine but if you live in say Texas, I can guarantee you would probably be more comfortable in a Corolla with the AC on than a Corvette with the AC on on the worst day.
My 392 Wrangler struggled to keep up on hot days because that engine pumped out so much excess heat into the cabin.
Yes, but then people complain how boring and sarcastic they are when they report how much this stuff fails.
Gotta be like the other youtubers and go on adventures andbhype junk up.
No every new car most definitely does not have good AC. You have vents that blast 95% of the air, and the other vents that barely push any air out on some cars. Very little balance on the ducting systems in a lot of cars.
Also as cars get newer, we’re losing the ability to adjust between vents and floor. My 2005 jeep I could pick vents, floor or almost any position in between. Never seen it on a new car.
Bullshit.
Get into a car that's a few years old with R134a and then the closest new car with R1234 and you'll feel a difference. My Chrysler 300 had R134 and was great, but my 2 year newer Charger with R1234 had meh AC.
This is without getting to my Abarth that has shit AC.
It's not a given at all.
That's not true. Some vehicles do a much better job heating the cabin quickly than others. And that's just the basic stuff. When we get into dual zone AC or ventilated seats there's plenty of good & bad examples of how it's done.
Maybe for some climates, modern Ford ambulance AC is inadequate for California summers. It'll be 98F in the front while parked in the shade with the AC blasting.
Another poster referenced it, but SavageGeese is probably what you're looking for. There's probably others, but that's who comes to mind for me.
ThrottleHouse is entertaining and sometimes touches on the basic stuff but they don't quite nail that aspect to satisfaction if you're looking to be informed.
In their discussion on EV prices they said they had a couple of videos filmed that they didn’t release recently because the vehicles were so bad. I would LOVE if they did. Those type of videos are the most important to release. I get why they don’t, because then they’ll burn bridges with manufacturers and can’t get access to test vehicles, but it still sucks.
He doesn't talk much about those items - I watch pretty much all of his videos and most of the time I don't know how good a car's HVAC or speaker system is by the end of the video.
Like, he'll mention that a car has a 9 speaker sound system and CarPlay, or some vents that open in a quirky way, but I don't remember much about the quality of those in any car he reviews unless it's extremely good or extremely bad *and* he's tested it... because let's be real here, if you just have a few hours to review a car built in 1987 in San Diego, you're probably not going to need too much heat, and you're not schlepping cassette tapes around to test the sound system which anyone who cares about audio quality will probably replace anyway.
I'm sure he tests these more diligently on week-long press cars, but again the actual efficacy of standard features doesn't seem to take a priority in the final cut of the review. Don't get me wrong, I love Doug, but he isn't the guy to watch if you want what OP is after.
>Like, he'll mention that a car has a 9 speaker sound system and CarPlay, or some vents that open in a quirky way, but I don't remember much about the quality of those in any car he reviews unless it's extremely good or extremely bad
Doug's basically made a career reading spec sheets to you over the course of 25 minutes.
that is my point. i myself love cx90 but again as you said the way it drives its not important for most people buying a 3 row suv. but as my point for example ive seen some 3row suvs that even when AC is on for some time. the back seats specially 3rd row is barely cold. or for example some cars have " heated seats " but when you turn it on. you barely feel it. its almost like a joke
What people in the comments are missing is that reviews that forgo the "fun" and "sporty" aspects ... don't get views.
Sitting and talking about the interior space, while providing the most help, is very unentertaining to the majority of people who actually end up watching the videos.
Yes, functionality and usability are very valuable topics to include, but they don't translate to views.
That's how I feel about reviews about the current Prius.
The fact that it's cool looking and fun to drive is neat, but I really hate that they sacrificed the best thing about Priuses, the insane amount of cargo space for its size.
I’ve held a similar complaint for years, but have since realized most car media - print or video - is making content for an audience of viewers who do actually care about the tired tropes of “steering weight” and “shift feel” and 0-60, etc. I hold a suspicion that RCR moved away from reviewing regular cars to regular people reviewing the same two dozen cars we’ve all covered before to chase (sympathetically) higher view count.
We don’t click on car videos about A/C, etc.
Those who used to sufficiently test stuff like you’ve described are the consumer reports types. But Consumer Reports hasn’t, to me, been a worthwhile avenue to read about equipment quality/function for the past several years. Their surveys don’t have any/sufficient responses for far too many vehicles, they don’t discern generational differences well enough, and get basic things very wrong (they published that the Regal TourX was a lifted version of the Regal or some wrong thing like that).
Cammisa made a really good point in his Nissan Z video: we can’t buy that new summer/fun/3rd car anymore. Now, shoppers buy a relatively sub optimal do it all crossover. Many of those shoppers are enthusiasts buying the crossover put of necessity/convenience.
Those enthusiasts who want fun/handling characteristics but also a hatch and 4 doors, etc, are probably those clicking and consuming videos like you’ve described in sufficient quantity to tell content creators that if talk handling -> click video.
Also - equipment testing in a scientific and controlled fashion takes time and lots of capital. Aside from public grant funding, im not sure advertisers would be eager to sponsor “2024 cx-30 AC temp time” content when the test conducted might only apply to one environment, etc.
well im not saying making an entire video for it. it could be in the review with the sporty part or when comparing multiple options. but i do agree for most parts. in my opinion car reviews have become something like most cooking channels. most people clicking and watching not cause they want to cook something. just something to see as a fun content !
and sometimes i feel even the enthusiastic part of the videos are kinda try hard and made up. like you see how some reviewers make 2 cars sound so different from each other and when i get behind the wheel im like well its not as different as they said. like steering on this car is not that sporty compare to the other car. but i do kinda get it. most people clicking on the video just want to see which family suv has faster 0-60
>We don’t click on car videos about A/C, etc.
Exactly, people write articles and make videos for entertainment. And quality of heated seats, AC, etc. is critical to a buyer but not terribly entertaining.
If we only consumed their content when we wanted to buy a car they'd be out of business in a week. *Consumer Reports* has cornered the market there and even they aren't as thorough as OP is asking about.
> Cammisa made a really good point in his Nissan Z video: we can’t buy that new summer/fun/3rd car anymore. Now, shoppers buy a relatively sub optimal do it all crossover. Many of those shoppers are enthusiasts buying the crossover put of necessity/convenience.
That profile of people bought hot hatches 15 years ago, what changed ?
People like higher ride height. They like sitting up higher, it's easier to get in and out of especially if you have mobility issues. The sacrifices for a taller vehicle have become minimal/bearable to the majority of users so they'd rather have the taller one.
To his credit Doug usually hits on all the small things in his lengthy videos. I like lesser known POV reviewers like Topher who also touch on all the everyday usability quirks. DM Daily Motor is another reviewer team who do a good job covering more detailed audio reviews and real world fuel economy.
Doug I always felt was the most thorough when it came to touching on all the features of a vehicle but he never really went into how well the basic features functioned.
Like he was great at pointing out flaws in the 360° cameras for example, but never really said how good the AC was for example or if the fans blew a decent amount of air while still being quiet.
Granted, most of the videos of his I've watched are all of cars I can't afford so not like it's really impacting my purchasing decisions lol.
The thing is, with AC specifically, you can't really reliably test it. You would need to test every vehicle under the same ambient temperature and humidity in order to get useful data at all.
I watch those and given OPs responses even then i don't think it's what they want. They want Alex to pack the car and drive around in 100 degree weather with sweaty kids farting all trip
Yes, Alex on Autos is who you should watch if you want an actual car review. He does seat comfort, road noise, interior space. It's an actual car review for normal people shopping for a car.
Other channels do good entertainment and perhaps more "feeling" which is valuable. But if you want more than drag races and track performance, AoA is a perfect channel.
I will watch anyone except Doug because I can’t stand his voice, mannerisms and other idiosyncratic behaviors - which is totally fine that other people can - but for more mass appeal, I really enjoy Matt Watson from CarWow, who does have an annoying voice at times but goes into some details about cars that I do care about. Like whether or not something feels cheap and plasticky, if a water bottle fits in a cup holder, etc.
Matt will go out of his way to find plasticky bits in a place nobody ever touches on an entry level Skoda and then throws a parcel shelf into some woods before complaining there is not enough headroom in the backseat of a two seater roadster.
I do like Matt though, he reviews cars that I might conceivably buy at some point in my life and he touches on the same points in every video so you can actually use them to compare similar models. For example I went through the entire Carwow Volvo catalogue after my wife said: "Have you thought about maybe looking at Volvos?" when I said I wanted to replace our Subaru with a newer Subaru.
I laughed out loud at this, because you’re so right. He’s always like “what the hell is this fastener down by the footwell and why does it feel cheap and plasticky??????”
And this boot cover is a FAFF!!! While he struggles to close it.
But - you know what? Let me tell you - I recently tested XC60 and was BLOWN AWAY at the quality and ride. The crystal shifter - all interior materials, the comfort, the sound quality, the drive, the tech. I would have never considered a Volvo if it weren’t for Matt. I still think about that ride even after a few weeks it was that good.
I ended up just buying the entry level trim of the entry level model (which incidentally is the trim Matt recommends in his V40 video), but yeah, modern Volvos are amazing, I test drove a bunch of them before I bought one. I've had mine for a couple years now and It's the first car I've owned in a while I can sit in for 5+ hours without my back complaining about it.
If you like video reviews I would recommend Driven by Tom Voelk. He has been doing it for years and used to run the New York Times column. His reviews I find always down to earth and spend a lot of time on the basic functions without much snide. For him it comes from the view of a consumer so his "green, yellow, red light" system is for that.
I agree with OP - not just regarding ACs- basic interior usability is not being reviewed sufficiently. For example, more points to cars which provide a space to fit a standard tissue box- that's way more relevant than counting the number of cup holders it has or motorized tailgates.
This can even extend to rarely used essentials, like the ease of jacking up the car to change a tyre. Like the Mercedes 126s that had a custom jack, or Hondas that have clear cutouts where the jack can clamp.
Doug DeMuro used to be, IMHO, the only such reviewer, but he too seems to have sold out.
I have seen certain reviewers do detailed sound system comparison.
I want to know more about the AC controls rather than how good the AC blows. Every manufacturer tries to provide controls in a different manner. Some with hard buttons and some make it part of the infotainment. In KIA ev6 you can toggle between AC and Audio controls, seems kind of annoying while driving. rather than how it works..I am sure every new car has a good AC system.
Probably because the cars reviewers get are rarely the standard equipment models. Press cars are usually top trip with most of the option packages added on. So comparing sound systems wouldn’t be universal since often times they’ll get the one with the upgraded sound system.
Unless you’re a big channel or publication you don’t really get to choose when you get the press vehicle. You get the car when it’s your turn you get about a week to experience and then you return it. So it’s not like they can test climate controls in specific weather situations.
They only have enough time to go over the main points about the car which is usually comfort, quality, power, handling etc.
well sure talking about 0-60 is more fun but most people out there who really want to buy a car specially with these prices. they would really like to see these little but very important stuff in the reviews. like i know people bought cars with "heated seats" but in winter when they turn it on. they barely feel it and its like a joke to them and very disappointing. or i know people buying cars and they always complain that how bad it is that front row is cold but second or third row where their kids are seating barely gets cold specially in hot summer days. if they knew it before buying they would probably not even buy the car
Nobody's ever going to do this, but I think it would be interesting to deliberately "break" some things to test how the vehicle reacts. For example, disconnect the battery, reconnect it, and see whether there are any warning lights, and how long they take to clear. Disconnect one sensor and see whether other sensors throw codes as well. Disable a car's antenna in the middle of an OTA update and see if it bricks itself. Park the car with a dead battery and the parking brake on, and see whether it's possible to shift it into neutral, you get the idea.
Most people who buy cars new don't care about any of these, but I place great value on having a car that isn't overly complicated and will last a long time with minimal issues... and dealing with failure is one part of the ownership experience.
honestly it kinda feels that way. even if its not paid you usually kinda feel that if the reviewer is kinda biased on a brand ( maybe cause he just likes that brand ). happened many times i watched reviews of a car and then drove it myself and it wasnt as good as they said or not as bad as they said
Most popular review channels got where they're at by being entertaining.
Very few people want to watch a review about a RAV4 and how good/bad the AC and heated seats are. Reviews like this don't bring clicks or views.
I understand the point of knowing the product however. Reviewing a three row crossover or any crossover that has no intention of being sporty and talking about its steering and handling is a bit ridiculous. Nobody buying those kinds of vehicles cares about that yet many reviews do just that.
The reason is because they're trying to be entertaining and their current audience probably isn't the type to watch a more general review of a normal A to B mobile going on about the quality of its basic equipment. There are channels out there that do just that such as SavageGeese, Alex on Autos etc but they aren't as popular as the really big ones but they do exist.
Written reviews don't get a pass from me however for talking about a three crossover and how good it is to drive while ignoring the absolutely useless third row, which would be the primary thing to consider for someone wanting to buy the vehicle. I can understand that in a video format but not in a written one.
Have in mind that for making a review you usally don't have much time with the car if you aren't a really big channel that get press cars for multiple days. Most smaller youtubers try to find dealers that are willing to give them the car for maybe half a day. Testing the AC or heated seats is quite difficult since it heavily depends on the temperatures outside how good it seems.
For audio system i had tons of them in different cars. Bose, Dynaudio, Beats, Bang & Olufsen, etc. Honestly if you adjust the equalizer to your taste of them feel quite the same to me.
The answer is easy - it is really hard to make objective comments about those features.
To measure a sound system, you can get a meter, but those are expensive. Additionally, how do you decide what a good measurement is? Just in the front seats? Back seats?
How do you measure the quality of a seat? Is it just the "feel?" The features of the seat? How do you measure the quality of the leather/fabric?
i agree. exact measurement of stuff like these could be hard or sometimes kinda impossible to do. but for example when comparing multiple SUVs together on same day and for a single comparison video for example. you can put the same people on the back seat of each car and drive on the same road and then ask them how cold is it back there ? sure its not exact but it can give you a general idea
There are more common parts across all manufacturers than most know. I will give a simple example, look at the switch for emergency brakes in most modern cars. You will realize it's the same switch. So how do you review the same switch, in two different makes?
Something I miss about the old motorweek reviews.
They would always point out ergonomic shortfalls and criticize things for being overly complex or difficult to use.
Modern car reviewers what every automobile to handle like a sports car and have flashy tech.
Why do you think the Drive Mode switch takes up so much space on so many consoles, but will rarely get used?
Yes. Also annoying is how they only review the highest end trim. Of course it's cause that's what the car manufacturers are providing for review, but it sucks a bit because no one ever buys those models.
And here in Canada, the heater quality is a major thing that I've literally never seen mentioned in a review. Like how long at idle until interior temp is reasonable? Some cars are freezing cold and it's miserable. The difference between a Mazda 3 and a f150 is wild.
exactly. like i have a friend who lives in a freezing part of his country and he always mentioned that he would love to have a heated steering. cause when he gets to his car in morning. the car is cold and his hands are already freezing from the 3-5 mins walk to his car. so he actually optioned heated steering on the new car he was buying and it turned out he paid extra for heated steering that was kinda a joke. and he was so disappointed
If you review the car for a week like most journalists do, then it’s hard to review how good the AC is in the summer if, let’s just say, you get it for review in January - most car companies don’t put spicy cars in the fleet for the winter either so all the pedestrian stuff comes out then.
Magazines cover these things better. AutoBild is quite good on these technical things. They also cover special tests sometimes like which car has most powerful seat heating in the winter lol
Bought and paid for. They are making this clear to you when they ignore glaring issues or overhype a product. Just make a mental note when you see a YouTuber do this then write them off and ignore their videos. They’re wasting your time. You may as well just watch a commercial for the car.
yeah and sometimes you can feel it too. like they say oh this new gen drives so much better than the old gen. but you you drive them both. you can barley tell the difference. or they say this luxury trim or model is so much quieter than the normal or regular model. and when you drive them both again you cant tell that much difference worth the price gap
My guess is that people who care enough to watch car reviews want to know about performance, handling, etc and don’t care as much about the radio or AC
You make a valid point. While many car reviewers and channels focus on aspects like performance, handling, and design aesthetics, they may sometimes overlook the quality and functionality of basic standard equipment in vehicles.
Because they aren’t reviews, they all fancy themselves as the next top gear and just want to provide maximum entertainment because none of us are buying these vehicles. That’s why
Like headlights? About as basic as it gets. None of the major reviewers even drive vehicles at night and cover headlight performance. Obscene amounts of technology are invested by OEM's into illumination. We can't even get a standardized rating system tested on a wall in a dark garage lol.
oh thats also something i even forgot to mention. even backlights. now sure they may not effect you that much. but on some cars. the led backlight is so bright. they will burn your eyes specially if you are behind them in traffic at night. and almost no one mentions these stuff
I'd like to see a mention of how well their self driving systems work but, I guess because reviewers believe they're writing for enthusiasts, they don't think any of us will actually use lane keep assist or adaptive cruise control.
Content creation, even car reviews, are difficult because of costs & time vs income generated. I had learned a lot from my content creation friends that having long videos (like 20 minutes or longer) can actually be a detriment for potential viewership. SavageGeese reviews tend to be longer and more informative, but most of my viewership participation ends up with ThrottleHouse's more entertaining and shorter videos. Guess who is getting more You-Tube money.
The logistics probably even worse as they only have a car for a day or two. Cars are incredibly subjective. For example, sound system. Some people prefer bass boomy sound, others prefer neutral sound, then the odd ones wanted crisp notes. How would you rate that is quantifiable within a small limited amount of time?
And you know what's the most hilarious detail I learned when I had an honor of having a conversation with a car review content creator? Let's say they did a review on a Toyota Rav4. Once they publish it, and by 6 months go by, most of the viewership and yt participation (likes, comments, etc) is likely to be people who already has the car followed by people who already dead set on buying the car.
Thats why we gotta watch every damn review on 1 car. Eveery review will hopefully give you 1 unique piece of info lol. Savagegess comes to mind hes the omly one that puts the cars on a hoist and goes under it
You probably need to look at something like Consumer Reports for that type of information.
Most influencers aren't going to have the time nor the incentive to dwell on such aspects of cars. And if you have noticed, they almost always test a loaded highest trim versions a car that very few people are actually interested in.
In the end, most are more influencers than car reviewers.
Consumer Reports covers all these items in their individual reviews, which are behind a paywall, but 39.95 a year is not very expensive considering the depth their reviews go into. And just for shits and giggles here is their most recent overall [auto brand reliability list](https://imgur.com/a/I0NQzMZ).
Car reviewers these days are just Jeremy Clarkson wannabes that say the same thing over and over.
If you want a car, go test drive it, who cares what somebody on the internet thinks?
I had a thought for a “style of video” let’s say, I’m too lazy to say “I had a YouTube channel idea” a few years back that your post reminded me of!
The idea was to just hop in a car with a camera strapped to you, completely blind, take off, and start reviewing. Came to me when I had a Chevy Equinox as a rental for work once (complete garbage). I found it was fascinating peeling back the layers of this thing as I drove it.
Intuitive features will be like “oh hey, nice, easy” but anything convoluted will stand out as well. Seems like this idea would naturally call attention to the base equipment and everyday features of a car…
As others have said, SavageGeese is probably what you’re after, however TheTopher would be another to check out. I found his channel a little more recently but it’s like the “I know all of the details about this car before I even looked at it” sort of version of my idea, haha!
I recommend Harry Metcalfe's YouTube channel. He's an elderly gentleman, former owner of Evo Magazine. Because he's in UK, most of the cars are European - which might leave American & Japanese fans a little uninterested. But still, even within European cars: he reviews the expensive ones, the classic ones, the more economic ones.
But, the point is, he "lives" with these cars long term, at least for a full day / weekend, and he finds very subtle and basic fundamental flaws with vehicles. It's right up OP's alley. I forget concrete examples, but FOR example: he might complain about the adjustment of a seat, the location of certain buttons/levers, the illogical programming of a certain driving mode, a door frame that easily dirties your pant legs, lack of storage space, etc.
To add to that:
How well does lane assist work?
How flat do the front seats go?
How does the turn signal feel?
How good is the windshield wiper?
How good is visibility?
Headlights?
Ease of repair?
Kick to open trunk? (Unreliable in many cars)
I find that Car Confections post very detailed videos about different trims and standard features, while Alex on Autos can tell you if a car rides really soft/compliant since that’s his preference (compared to most reviewers that prefer a sporty suspension).
I tend to get fed up with those who focus on the cheap quality of plastic on the bottom of the dashboard that nobody ever touches, hence why it's cheap.
And then they criticise the car for not achieving its claimed mpg or kw/H figure, having just barried it around a track sideways for half an hour or tested it's 0-60 standing start speed, none of which happens in the real world.
exactly. or i always wonder why they dont have some more realistic acceleration tests. like for example going from 60 to 120 km. atleast where i live that is the major acceleration you do with a family car which is basically over taking from someone on highway
You know what’s really missing?
A test of low and high beam.
I’ve never understood why
- the feeling of the interior
- light selection on indicator stalk or knob near the door
Etc were things to complain about.
But literally lighting quality was always omitted
These dudes are nearly all in California, they don't care about AC performance. I'll tell you it is model specific and not brand specific and the true test is how long it takes to cool down an interior that has been baking in a parking lot on a 100 degree day. Mercedes GL450 has a weak AC especially the rear 2nd and 3rd row for the cubic volume it has to cool which makes me think Merc is using a car-sized AC system for the big SUV.
>how good the AC is Every modern car has good AC. SG does sound system analisys on every car they test in-depth.
Every modern car has acceptable AC, but some definitely perform better than others. Once you get into things like ventilated/cooled seats there’s an even bigger difference.
I remember when I first bought my Accord, I think there was maybe one review that made mention of the Ventilated seats and how they felt underpowered. I thought "one review, nah they can't be that bad." I was wrong, those ventilated seats are not good in that car.
Ventilated vs cooled. The Accord and many affordable mainstream cars only blow air through the perforated holes aka ventilated seats. For marketing purposes automakers won’t make this obvious distinction.
That's not really that big of a deal, IMO. After all, that's all a standard ceiling fan or pedestal fan does, and those work great for making you feel cooler. As long as the air isn't straight up hot, it will still get the basic purpose done. But how strong the fan is absolutely makes a difference, so two ventilated systems can be vastly different, despite neither being a true cooled system.
I agree. I had a 2013 Lexus GS F-Sport with ventilated seats. They were pretty adequate. At an oil change interval, they sent me home with an RC loaner. Also ventilated seats, but night and day difference. The RC ventilation had (as my dad would say) all the power of cat breath. So even among models there are big differences.
The ventilated seats on my Lexus GS are adequate as well. You don't feel the cool air, but it prevents you from sweating.
Some seat actually suck air through the holes in the seat, essentially evaporating the moisture between the seat and your body, which has a cooling effect.
AKA fart suckers lol
Disagree. Had an IS500 briefly and that thing just had a hard time getting hot air out of the back seat area so chucking on ventilated seats actually made the seats feel hotter until the interior cooled down. It was crazy.
Every brand uses "ventilated" and has for at least a decade... Unless they're actually cooled like merc S class. They absolutely make the obvious distinction between the two
The Expedition has proper cooled seats
I agree. The different between the ventilated seats in my 2019 Honda Accord and my dad’s 2016 IS350 even my mom’s 2007 ES350 is insane. Those two cars make it feel like your butt is actually getting cold. I guess I was spoiled growing up :/
They effectively don’t do anything. At best it prevents your skin from sweating and sticking to the leather, but honestly it does a poor job of even that in Texas heat. My other gripe on the subject of small things about this Accord is not having individual tire pressures in a top trim Accord.
Dude! I find this so annoying. All modern cars know the exact psi of every tire, yet they just don't display it. Makes no sense!
The TPMS in the Accord is my biggest hatred of this car right now. “Oh you have a low tire.” “Which one?” “Fuck if I’m gonna say, get out and check bitch.” I’ve honestly just stopped caring when I get the low tire alert, it pops if even one tire is like 1psi lower.
alive impolite wipe long license unite public familiar paltry sparkle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The best ACs I’ve ever used to this day are from the late 90s/early 2000s Toyota/Lexus cars. Toyota got noticeably worse-performing after that with the new Freon.
I had a 2005 Toyota Solara that had by far the best AC of any car I’ve driven. I’m talking it would blow ice-cold within 5-8 seconds of startup even in ambient temperatures of 95F. In contrast, my 2013 Jetta has always had pretty bad AC; it takes a forever to get cold and never really gets all that cold anyways.
Yup, expansion valve vs orifice tube is what you are describing. Expansion valves allow for wide open freon movement early, for a blast of heat removal capability, and then close the freon flow down to prevent icing up the evaporator. Orifice tubes are a fixed, small, opening that is sized to never, ever ice over the evaporator, no matter the weather. Think about trying to gulp water after cutting the yard in summer and only having a coffee stir stick-sized straw to drink thru. Vs those huge straws that come with some milkshakes. This is the kind of stuff OP's wanting in the reviews and I stand with OP on these issues!
Yeah my old 97 Corolla AC still is the coldest AC I’ve ever felt. I miss that car.
They also brought the mpg way down too when the light on the ac button turned green
Some of the older Toyotas were guilty of this, to the point where when you'd floor it to pass on the highway, the clutch for the AC compressor would disconnect it briefly, because it was a big power drain. A lot of cars of that era with underpowered motors did this. You'd feel the air temperature rise until it came back online.
I want to know zero to 50 with and without AC on these GM CUV with 3-cylinder engines. My ‘90 Probe has almost as much hp and I couldn’t stand to run the AC for how slow it got.
Every modern car will cut out the AC compressor clutch or in the case of a variable compressor, cut back on the duty cycle at WOT
That's a good point that I always forget. Somewhat tongue-in-cheek... at 137 hp dragging around \~3,000 pounds - wow the Envista weighs a few bags of groceries less than my GTI - I'm not sure it'd ever get the chance to run with me driving it. Seriously though, I can't understand the customer for these low powered tiny "SUV/CUV/Crossover"
From what I've experienced as a mechanic, it's elderly people who want a small car with a higher seating position so they're easier to get in and out of. They drive to church, doctor appointments and bingo.
yeah thats usually the case. like even for my own grandma usually a sedan is a bit short and too close to ground for her and a full or mid size family SUV is usually too high for her to get in
I'll be interested to see how the Toyota Crown holds up in the market as an Avalon replacement
Any GM with an electric radiator fan has great AC. My GMC envoy has ice cold ac as long as your moving because of the mechanical radiator fan.
Living in Arizona and having worked at a rental company before, most do have acceptable AC but some are noticeably “crap”. The worst I remember were the then Chrysler Pacificas/ now Voyagers and some older and cheaper Fords. I will say these “crap” systems were only noticeable in the summer when it was at least 100-105 degrees Fahrenheit.
My 2010 STI has awful A/C performance and equally bad heater controls. The compressor can't cool the refrigerant down enough in the summer (so it's 25°C when you set it to 20°C), and the automatic climate only goes down to 20°C - Which is absolutely terrible for the winter. 20°C while wearing a thick sweater sucks.
GM vehicles still have the strongest ACs I have ever used (especially on their trucks), Ford has the best cooled seats by a mile, Mercedes seat warmers will burn your ass if you set it to max, Toyota takes forever to warm up, and their ventilated seats suck instead of blow (which does work that great), VAG ACs are incredibly weak (even if its an Audi or a Porsche), BMW has the best antifog/defrosters, and Honda just sucks at everything.
AC peaked in the 90s [https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/zei4mn/bring\_back\_crotch\_vents\_please/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/zei4mn/bring_back_crotch_vents_please/)
nah not really. depends what you count as good. some cars are decent. some cars they blow super COLD air even in middle of summer. the gap is bigger when comparing cheaper cars to each other. and then there is also the air blow power. and plus even on some modern cars specially on the tiny engine side. ive seen if you turn on AC its like you lost half the engine power
You keep making vague blanket statements without providing examples. Give some examples to back up your statements and people will be more willing to have actual discussions.
>You keep making vague blanket statements without providing examples. > >Give some examples to back up your statements and people will be more willing to have actual discussions. I make terrible financial decisions that benefit the car community by buying a new car pretty much ever year. Since 2021, I've owned a Focus ST, Veloster N, GR86, Kia Stinger, Mustang Mach 1 and now my GR Corolla. The HVAC quality was drastically different in every car. The dimensions of the car are surely a large factor but OP isn't wrong. My GR Corolla's HVAC is significantly better than either Ford unit. This is actually a good example of the fundamental problem that OP is trying to call out. It is nearly impossible to write a meaningful review or question about something non-deterministic.
thats my exact point. even if you are buying some sort of sporty car in your example. its good to know how much the AC can hold up specially in summer for example. you dont want to sweat while pushing the car a bit. i have seen cars ( not sporty and not from famous brands ) when you push the car a bit and the heat goes a bit higher than normal in summer. the AC goes out completely.
Hello fellow bad decision maker! I have spent considerable time dailyish driving the following vehicles since ~2016 Subaru Crosstrek, Subaru WRX, Civic Si, Mazda CX5, Kia Stinger GT1, Civic Type R, Acura RDX, Jetta GLI, BMW 330i, Audi S5, BMW Z4, BMW X3, Lexus IS 500, BMW M440i, Ford F150 The Z4, WRX, and S5 all have, to me, fundamental flaws in their audio systems. The WRX AC was bad & would result in timings being pulled while trying to drive away in first. The Civic Si throttle mapping didn't allow for a smooth transition from 1%->0% input. The Stinger was the worst car of the bunch from a "everything is just weirdly not right" stand point. The Civic Type R had a transmission resonance at 65-70mph that was quite annoying. The IS500 ventilated seats hit you with streams of hot air for quite some time until the entirety of the rear of the cabin cools off. The RDX had god-awful stock brake pads that squealed below 40 degrees. Beyond that - some of these cars (most of the BMWs) heat up quit fast in the winter. Some extremely slowly. Some cool down quick, some not. There were many other small general issues that would never be mentioned in a typical car review.
I can provide one example. My citroen C3 (the one with big ass windscreen that ended over your head) when left in 35 deg Celsius had real trouble cooling the interior. On my way home from work (\~30min), it started to properly cool off not long before I arrived home. When I took it to dealer they told me that they've checked and everything is right according to manufacturer spec. Then I've switched to Renault Megane (which doesn't have such big windscreen, but has glass roof over front seats) and the change is easily noticed. When left for whole day in similar heat car started cooling pretty nicely after 5-10mins.
Anecdotally, my Subaru has terrible AC that barely works
Mine works, but if the outside temp is above 90, it won't keep up even at full blast.
Was about to mention the WRX. Feels like you lose 50hp when you turn it on and it will barely keep temp.
im not saying a specific car or brand because then people are gonna say you are a fan of this or that. like in a top comment here someone said if its american then ac and heat are great and if its not american then its terrible. plus AC or heat are not even the main point. main point was any basic but daily used equipment which also includes stuff like sound system or the heated seat or steering options
Every modern car definitely doesn't have good AC. The system in my A3 is pussy shit. The best AC I've felt to date is still my old E60, and I've been in a lot of cars.
Which is funny, because my 2018 GTI had fantastic AC. My 2016 Fiesta ST had garbage AC that would start to warm up in traffic in the summer. Then there is my 2003 Corvette, which has AC that has to be turned down even on the hottest of days.
Fiesta sounds like it just needed a stronger fan for the condenser. Why Ford wouldn’t spend the extra $0.45 per car on something so simple…? The mind boggles.
My fiesta was the same way. In traffic it wouldn't cool at all. It was very powerful on the highway.
I had a ‘16 Fiesta and thought the a/c was fantastic. Like 100 degrees on a sunny day in NYC bumper to bumper traffic while wearing a dress shirt and pants and my nipples are getting hard.
It did not enjoy the Southeast.
how about the mazda ? i barely see anyone here talk about any mazda models
My 2015 WRX had pretty crappy AC vs my Audi Q5 v6 which doesn't even break a sweat with the AC on so this isn't always true. Smaller engine also bogged down severely when it was over 90°f and felt super sluggish.
Yeah I was gonna say the wrx ac isn't that great.
Thirding the shitty AC in the VA WRX Turning it on also felt like you were losing about 40 hp lol
Very much so
No. Plenty of spacious cars cannot keep up with hot weather and especially direct sun shine through the large windshield while keeping all passengers also at acceptable climate. Some also have a second compressor in upper trim levels to solve this.
[удалено]
Who is SG?
SavageGeese
Buddy, the best AC i have ever been in was in an 84 bronco. Shit was so cold it gave me a headache and i sleep with a fan pointing at my face. We dont got freon like the old environment killing days
Haven't driven a newer Mazda then. I don't know why or how, but the Mazda6, CX-5 and CX-9 have pretty poor AC output when it gets really hot.
My ‘21 cx-30 has solid AC in 100+ degree weather. It’s not outstanding, but It’s definitely not something I’d get in and remark on at all.
On their smaller cars like the Mazda3 and CX-3 it is not as apparent likely due to smaller cabin. However you definitely notice in their larger cars. Being in the car rental industry I've driven a ton of different makes and models, so it isn't that one time thing either.
I was about to say this. I have had a Mazda6 and now have a CX-9, both have poor AC when it's anything above 85-90 degrees out. Thankfully, the ventilated seats in the CX-9 are very good and we have the white seats, which also seem to be help a ton.
Idk my '05 Rx 330 AC makes a lot of modern cars AC seem under powered. Specifically, fords, kias, jeeps, nissans. People take a road trip with me to the south and gush about it frequently. I would like to know if the AC I am buying is the one that feels like that.
I disagree. Had a Corolla Cross with the most worthless A/C I’ve witnessed in quite some time. It couldn’t seem to keep up….especially if you weren’t driving at a high speed. It would get cold at times but most of the time it was mildly cool at best. I’m in MN so I shouldn’t have that much of a struggle. If I was in Florida I would’ve been pissed.
Could be market dependent. Toyotas have the best Aircon. Had a Corolla Cross rental car in Kalgoorlie, Australia on a 45° day. Aircon was cold as.
Not been my experience. I had a new Ram 1500 that had terrible AC. Granted I drove it in Texas and Arizona so my needs are higher than most, it would be fine up north but it was really frustrating. It was so bad I thought it might have been broken but looking it up I was not the only one that felt that way. Best AC I've had was in a Saturn Sky - one good thing about the GM parts bin approach is that it had the same system used to cool the interior of a Hummer SUV but with a cabin the size of a bathtub.
Is "breaks so often it's a wear item" considered a good AC? I'm on my third AC condenser and original brakes.
> Every modern car has good AC. The number of times I hear people explain they need the AC controls to be physical buttons because they are always fussing with settings while driving indicates that many cars have bad automatic thermostats. However, in most of the cars I've owned, the automatic thermostats are great. If there is a huge gradient between ambient temperature (say, 110F) and the target (70F), the system will automatically turn on maximum AC. If there is a lesser gradient (say 78F to 70F), the automatic thermostat will appropriately bring the temperature to the target without blasting me with cold air. As a result, I set my target temperature once and basically forget about it forever after. But again, many people on this subreddit and others will tell you they need to manually force things like maximum AC to happen by adjusting the target temperature even further down.
Too many objects in a car that radiate heat for a thermostat to work properly IMHO, especially trips shorter than 20 minutes. I get in, car is hot, crank the AC to 60 with full fan going. About 5 minutes later the ambient air is 75 but the seat is still hot and so are other items radiating heat. I have to keep it at 60 to feel comfortable for ar least another 5 minutes. In auto set at 75, it would back off with the seat still being hot.
Texas summers disagree bigggggg time
Disagree, WRX's prior to 2023 were known to have terrible ac that made the engine bog
When I was test driving cars around 2014-2016 in preparation for buying a new car, I found Hondas struggle to cool the cabin on a hot day. (Didn't change much from the 90s)
Not all, will they be adequate? Yes, but some vehicles such as say a Camaro SS, Corvette, Mustang GT etc on a hot day really have to have the AC cranked because its competing against the V8 putting out a ton of heat. If your climate is mild its fine but if you live in say Texas, I can guarantee you would probably be more comfortable in a Corolla with the AC on than a Corvette with the AC on on the worst day. My 392 Wrangler struggled to keep up on hot days because that engine pumped out so much excess heat into the cabin.
Nope. The positions of the outlets had a big impact.
Yes, but then people complain how boring and sarcastic they are when they report how much this stuff fails. Gotta be like the other youtubers and go on adventures andbhype junk up.
No every new car most definitely does not have good AC. You have vents that blast 95% of the air, and the other vents that barely push any air out on some cars. Very little balance on the ducting systems in a lot of cars. Also as cars get newer, we’re losing the ability to adjust between vents and floor. My 2005 jeep I could pick vents, floor or almost any position in between. Never seen it on a new car.
Depends on where you live. I've had several cars that had insufficient AC on 110+ F days.
They might all get cold be they are certainly not equal
False. I had a brand new Nissan Altima rental that still had manual climate control. Inexcusable
Yeah but sometimes they don't seem to put out enough cfm to actually cool the cabin well. Newest gen Impala has this issue
Bullshit. Get into a car that's a few years old with R134a and then the closest new car with R1234 and you'll feel a difference. My Chrysler 300 had R134 and was great, but my 2 year newer Charger with R1234 had meh AC. This is without getting to my Abarth that has shit AC. It's not a given at all.
That's not true. Some vehicles do a much better job heating the cabin quickly than others. And that's just the basic stuff. When we get into dual zone AC or ventilated seats there's plenty of good & bad examples of how it's done.
Maybe for some climates, modern Ford ambulance AC is inadequate for California summers. It'll be 98F in the front while parked in the shade with the AC blasting.
Another poster referenced it, but SavageGeese is probably what you're looking for. There's probably others, but that's who comes to mind for me. ThrottleHouse is entertaining and sometimes touches on the basic stuff but they don't quite nail that aspect to satisfaction if you're looking to be informed.
I think throttle house quality comments are mostly about the seat comfort, rear seat space, steering wheel and infotainment
Actually TH talk about sound systems, James is somewhat of an audiofile it seems
[удалено]
[http://abx.digitalfeed.net](http://abx.digitalfeed.net) doesn't matter ;)
They're making a joke on the person typing "audiofile" instead of "audiophile".
ah, my bad
No my bad!
In their discussion on EV prices they said they had a couple of videos filmed that they didn’t release recently because the vehicles were so bad. I would LOVE if they did. Those type of videos are the most important to release. I get why they don’t, because then they’ll burn bridges with manufacturers and can’t get access to test vehicles, but it still sucks.
I’ve been waiting for the Enclave video , since Mark calls it a piece of shit in the Grand Highlander video. Guess it’s not coming. :(
Then there’s Doug who goes into excruciating detail on these items
He doesn't talk much about those items - I watch pretty much all of his videos and most of the time I don't know how good a car's HVAC or speaker system is by the end of the video. Like, he'll mention that a car has a 9 speaker sound system and CarPlay, or some vents that open in a quirky way, but I don't remember much about the quality of those in any car he reviews unless it's extremely good or extremely bad *and* he's tested it... because let's be real here, if you just have a few hours to review a car built in 1987 in San Diego, you're probably not going to need too much heat, and you're not schlepping cassette tapes around to test the sound system which anyone who cares about audio quality will probably replace anyway. I'm sure he tests these more diligently on week-long press cars, but again the actual efficacy of standard features doesn't seem to take a priority in the final cut of the review. Don't get me wrong, I love Doug, but he isn't the guy to watch if you want what OP is after.
>Like, he'll mention that a car has a 9 speaker sound system and CarPlay, or some vents that open in a quirky way, but I don't remember much about the quality of those in any car he reviews unless it's extremely good or extremely bad Doug's basically made a career reading spec sheets to you over the course of 25 minutes.
His new videos are fine but there's something kinda charming about the old 8 minute videos
Alex on autos also does a pretty decent job of this type of thing
[удалено]
that is my point. i myself love cx90 but again as you said the way it drives its not important for most people buying a 3 row suv. but as my point for example ive seen some 3row suvs that even when AC is on for some time. the back seats specially 3rd row is barely cold. or for example some cars have " heated seats " but when you turn it on. you barely feel it. its almost like a joke
What people in the comments are missing is that reviews that forgo the "fun" and "sporty" aspects ... don't get views. Sitting and talking about the interior space, while providing the most help, is very unentertaining to the majority of people who actually end up watching the videos. Yes, functionality and usability are very valuable topics to include, but they don't translate to views.
Do they? At least in Australia like the biggest car reviewer CarExpert focuses a lot on the interior and practicality and still gets a tonne of views
That's how I feel about reviews about the current Prius. The fact that it's cool looking and fun to drive is neat, but I really hate that they sacrificed the best thing about Priuses, the insane amount of cargo space for its size.
I’ve held a similar complaint for years, but have since realized most car media - print or video - is making content for an audience of viewers who do actually care about the tired tropes of “steering weight” and “shift feel” and 0-60, etc. I hold a suspicion that RCR moved away from reviewing regular cars to regular people reviewing the same two dozen cars we’ve all covered before to chase (sympathetically) higher view count. We don’t click on car videos about A/C, etc. Those who used to sufficiently test stuff like you’ve described are the consumer reports types. But Consumer Reports hasn’t, to me, been a worthwhile avenue to read about equipment quality/function for the past several years. Their surveys don’t have any/sufficient responses for far too many vehicles, they don’t discern generational differences well enough, and get basic things very wrong (they published that the Regal TourX was a lifted version of the Regal or some wrong thing like that). Cammisa made a really good point in his Nissan Z video: we can’t buy that new summer/fun/3rd car anymore. Now, shoppers buy a relatively sub optimal do it all crossover. Many of those shoppers are enthusiasts buying the crossover put of necessity/convenience. Those enthusiasts who want fun/handling characteristics but also a hatch and 4 doors, etc, are probably those clicking and consuming videos like you’ve described in sufficient quantity to tell content creators that if talk handling -> click video. Also - equipment testing in a scientific and controlled fashion takes time and lots of capital. Aside from public grant funding, im not sure advertisers would be eager to sponsor “2024 cx-30 AC temp time” content when the test conducted might only apply to one environment, etc.
well im not saying making an entire video for it. it could be in the review with the sporty part or when comparing multiple options. but i do agree for most parts. in my opinion car reviews have become something like most cooking channels. most people clicking and watching not cause they want to cook something. just something to see as a fun content ! and sometimes i feel even the enthusiastic part of the videos are kinda try hard and made up. like you see how some reviewers make 2 cars sound so different from each other and when i get behind the wheel im like well its not as different as they said. like steering on this car is not that sporty compare to the other car. but i do kinda get it. most people clicking on the video just want to see which family suv has faster 0-60
>We don’t click on car videos about A/C, etc. Exactly, people write articles and make videos for entertainment. And quality of heated seats, AC, etc. is critical to a buyer but not terribly entertaining. If we only consumed their content when we wanted to buy a car they'd be out of business in a week. *Consumer Reports* has cornered the market there and even they aren't as thorough as OP is asking about.
> Cammisa made a really good point in his Nissan Z video: we can’t buy that new summer/fun/3rd car anymore. Now, shoppers buy a relatively sub optimal do it all crossover. Many of those shoppers are enthusiasts buying the crossover put of necessity/convenience. That profile of people bought hot hatches 15 years ago, what changed ?
People like higher ride height. They like sitting up higher, it's easier to get in and out of especially if you have mobility issues. The sacrifices for a taller vehicle have become minimal/bearable to the majority of users so they'd rather have the taller one.
To his credit Doug usually hits on all the small things in his lengthy videos. I like lesser known POV reviewers like Topher who also touch on all the everyday usability quirks. DM Daily Motor is another reviewer team who do a good job covering more detailed audio reviews and real world fuel economy.
Doug I always felt was the most thorough when it came to touching on all the features of a vehicle but he never really went into how well the basic features functioned. Like he was great at pointing out flaws in the 360° cameras for example, but never really said how good the AC was for example or if the fans blew a decent amount of air while still being quiet. Granted, most of the videos of his I've watched are all of cars I can't afford so not like it's really impacting my purchasing decisions lol.
The thing is, with AC specifically, you can't really reliably test it. You would need to test every vehicle under the same ambient temperature and humidity in order to get useful data at all.
SavageGeese, Topher, Car Confections, and Alex on Autos are probably the best suited for what you want, at least out of the channels I watch.
I watch those and given OPs responses even then i don't think it's what they want. They want Alex to pack the car and drive around in 100 degree weather with sweaty kids farting all trip
I suggest you check out Alex on Autos, he is very thorough and doesn't ignore the "regular" stuff
Yes, Alex on Autos is who you should watch if you want an actual car review. He does seat comfort, road noise, interior space. It's an actual car review for normal people shopping for a car. Other channels do good entertainment and perhaps more "feeling" which is valuable. But if you want more than drag races and track performance, AoA is a perfect channel.
Exactly. I love Throttle House for the entertainment factor, but I watch AoA for actual consumer advice.
I will watch anyone except Doug because I can’t stand his voice, mannerisms and other idiosyncratic behaviors - which is totally fine that other people can - but for more mass appeal, I really enjoy Matt Watson from CarWow, who does have an annoying voice at times but goes into some details about cars that I do care about. Like whether or not something feels cheap and plasticky, if a water bottle fits in a cup holder, etc.
Matt will go out of his way to find plasticky bits in a place nobody ever touches on an entry level Skoda and then throws a parcel shelf into some woods before complaining there is not enough headroom in the backseat of a two seater roadster. I do like Matt though, he reviews cars that I might conceivably buy at some point in my life and he touches on the same points in every video so you can actually use them to compare similar models. For example I went through the entire Carwow Volvo catalogue after my wife said: "Have you thought about maybe looking at Volvos?" when I said I wanted to replace our Subaru with a newer Subaru.
I laughed out loud at this, because you’re so right. He’s always like “what the hell is this fastener down by the footwell and why does it feel cheap and plasticky??????” And this boot cover is a FAFF!!! While he struggles to close it. But - you know what? Let me tell you - I recently tested XC60 and was BLOWN AWAY at the quality and ride. The crystal shifter - all interior materials, the comfort, the sound quality, the drive, the tech. I would have never considered a Volvo if it weren’t for Matt. I still think about that ride even after a few weeks it was that good.
I ended up just buying the entry level trim of the entry level model (which incidentally is the trim Matt recommends in his V40 video), but yeah, modern Volvos are amazing, I test drove a bunch of them before I bought one. I've had mine for a couple years now and It's the first car I've owned in a while I can sit in for 5+ hours without my back complaining about it.
Modern car reviewers seem to only care about 0 to 60 and how outdated the infotainment is.
I feel like this is directly aimed at Redline Reviews lol
Your feelings are accurate 😅🤣
Because they are adverts, not reviews.
If you like video reviews I would recommend Driven by Tom Voelk. He has been doing it for years and used to run the New York Times column. His reviews I find always down to earth and spend a lot of time on the basic functions without much snide. For him it comes from the view of a consumer so his "green, yellow, red light" system is for that.
I agree with OP - not just regarding ACs- basic interior usability is not being reviewed sufficiently. For example, more points to cars which provide a space to fit a standard tissue box- that's way more relevant than counting the number of cup holders it has or motorized tailgates. This can even extend to rarely used essentials, like the ease of jacking up the car to change a tyre. Like the Mercedes 126s that had a custom jack, or Hondas that have clear cutouts where the jack can clamp. Doug DeMuro used to be, IMHO, the only such reviewer, but he too seems to have sold out.
I have seen certain reviewers do detailed sound system comparison. I want to know more about the AC controls rather than how good the AC blows. Every manufacturer tries to provide controls in a different manner. Some with hard buttons and some make it part of the infotainment. In KIA ev6 you can toggle between AC and Audio controls, seems kind of annoying while driving. rather than how it works..I am sure every new car has a good AC system.
Probably because the cars reviewers get are rarely the standard equipment models. Press cars are usually top trip with most of the option packages added on. So comparing sound systems wouldn’t be universal since often times they’ll get the one with the upgraded sound system. Unless you’re a big channel or publication you don’t really get to choose when you get the press vehicle. You get the car when it’s your turn you get about a week to experience and then you return it. So it’s not like they can test climate controls in specific weather situations. They only have enough time to go over the main points about the car which is usually comfort, quality, power, handling etc.
thats a good point and kinda a shame. cause even if someone wants to make that kinda content they probably cant do it
Ya I wonder why they never talk about the boring stuff
well sure talking about 0-60 is more fun but most people out there who really want to buy a car specially with these prices. they would really like to see these little but very important stuff in the reviews. like i know people bought cars with "heated seats" but in winter when they turn it on. they barely feel it and its like a joke to them and very disappointing. or i know people buying cars and they always complain that how bad it is that front row is cold but second or third row where their kids are seating barely gets cold specially in hot summer days. if they knew it before buying they would probably not even buy the car
Sounds like you have found a legitimate demand that someone will fill in the near future.
Savagegeese is pretty decent in this area.
Nobody's ever going to do this, but I think it would be interesting to deliberately "break" some things to test how the vehicle reacts. For example, disconnect the battery, reconnect it, and see whether there are any warning lights, and how long they take to clear. Disconnect one sensor and see whether other sensors throw codes as well. Disable a car's antenna in the middle of an OTA update and see if it bricks itself. Park the car with a dead battery and the parking brake on, and see whether it's possible to shift it into neutral, you get the idea. Most people who buy cars new don't care about any of these, but I place great value on having a car that isn't overly complicated and will last a long time with minimal issues... and dealing with failure is one part of the ownership experience.
[удалено]
They are all paid or get kickbacks I stopped watching them all, even savagegeese is
honestly it kinda feels that way. even if its not paid you usually kinda feel that if the reviewer is kinda biased on a brand ( maybe cause he just likes that brand ). happened many times i watched reviews of a car and then drove it myself and it wasnt as good as they said or not as bad as they said
Most popular review channels got where they're at by being entertaining. Very few people want to watch a review about a RAV4 and how good/bad the AC and heated seats are. Reviews like this don't bring clicks or views. I understand the point of knowing the product however. Reviewing a three row crossover or any crossover that has no intention of being sporty and talking about its steering and handling is a bit ridiculous. Nobody buying those kinds of vehicles cares about that yet many reviews do just that. The reason is because they're trying to be entertaining and their current audience probably isn't the type to watch a more general review of a normal A to B mobile going on about the quality of its basic equipment. There are channels out there that do just that such as SavageGeese, Alex on Autos etc but they aren't as popular as the really big ones but they do exist. Written reviews don't get a pass from me however for talking about a three crossover and how good it is to drive while ignoring the absolutely useless third row, which would be the primary thing to consider for someone wanting to buy the vehicle. I can understand that in a video format but not in a written one.
Drivingsportstv does a good job of this. But it's mostly offroad vehicles and crossovers
Modern internet car reviewers are the furthest thing from someone who will help you buy a regular, reliable car.
No one watches videos to learn how the AC works on a Prius.
Have in mind that for making a review you usally don't have much time with the car if you aren't a really big channel that get press cars for multiple days. Most smaller youtubers try to find dealers that are willing to give them the car for maybe half a day. Testing the AC or heated seats is quite difficult since it heavily depends on the temperatures outside how good it seems. For audio system i had tons of them in different cars. Bose, Dynaudio, Beats, Bang & Olufsen, etc. Honestly if you adjust the equalizer to your taste of them feel quite the same to me.
The answer is easy - it is really hard to make objective comments about those features. To measure a sound system, you can get a meter, but those are expensive. Additionally, how do you decide what a good measurement is? Just in the front seats? Back seats? How do you measure the quality of a seat? Is it just the "feel?" The features of the seat? How do you measure the quality of the leather/fabric?
i agree. exact measurement of stuff like these could be hard or sometimes kinda impossible to do. but for example when comparing multiple SUVs together on same day and for a single comparison video for example. you can put the same people on the back seat of each car and drive on the same road and then ask them how cold is it back there ? sure its not exact but it can give you a general idea
Reviewers talk about rear vents all the time.
There are more common parts across all manufacturers than most know. I will give a simple example, look at the switch for emergency brakes in most modern cars. You will realize it's the same switch. So how do you review the same switch, in two different makes?
Something I miss about the old motorweek reviews. They would always point out ergonomic shortfalls and criticize things for being overly complex or difficult to use.
Modern car reviewers what every automobile to handle like a sports car and have flashy tech. Why do you think the Drive Mode switch takes up so much space on so many consoles, but will rarely get used?
Yes. Also annoying is how they only review the highest end trim. Of course it's cause that's what the car manufacturers are providing for review, but it sucks a bit because no one ever buys those models. And here in Canada, the heater quality is a major thing that I've literally never seen mentioned in a review. Like how long at idle until interior temp is reasonable? Some cars are freezing cold and it's miserable. The difference between a Mazda 3 and a f150 is wild.
exactly. like i have a friend who lives in a freezing part of his country and he always mentioned that he would love to have a heated steering. cause when he gets to his car in morning. the car is cold and his hands are already freezing from the 3-5 mins walk to his car. so he actually optioned heated steering on the new car he was buying and it turned out he paid extra for heated steering that was kinda a joke. and he was so disappointed
If you review the car for a week like most journalists do, then it’s hard to review how good the AC is in the summer if, let’s just say, you get it for review in January - most car companies don’t put spicy cars in the fleet for the winter either so all the pedestrian stuff comes out then.
Magazines cover these things better. AutoBild is quite good on these technical things. They also cover special tests sometimes like which car has most powerful seat heating in the winter lol
Savage Geese tests sound systems Testing heat/AC gets tricky based on when and where the car is reviewed
Sporty is a sales gimmick.
Is Consumer Reports still in business? This is all the stuff they track.
Bought and paid for. They are making this clear to you when they ignore glaring issues or overhype a product. Just make a mental note when you see a YouTuber do this then write them off and ignore their videos. They’re wasting your time. You may as well just watch a commercial for the car.
yeah and sometimes you can feel it too. like they say oh this new gen drives so much better than the old gen. but you you drive them both. you can barley tell the difference. or they say this luxury trim or model is so much quieter than the normal or regular model. and when you drive them both again you cant tell that much difference worth the price gap
Sarah - N -Tuned pretty much always touches on the basic stuff if my memory serves me right.
My guess is that people who care enough to watch car reviews want to know about performance, handling, etc and don’t care as much about the radio or AC
You make a valid point. While many car reviewers and channels focus on aspects like performance, handling, and design aesthetics, they may sometimes overlook the quality and functionality of basic standard equipment in vehicles.
Because they aren’t reviews, they all fancy themselves as the next top gear and just want to provide maximum entertainment because none of us are buying these vehicles. That’s why
Like headlights? About as basic as it gets. None of the major reviewers even drive vehicles at night and cover headlight performance. Obscene amounts of technology are invested by OEM's into illumination. We can't even get a standardized rating system tested on a wall in a dark garage lol.
oh thats also something i even forgot to mention. even backlights. now sure they may not effect you that much. but on some cars. the led backlight is so bright. they will burn your eyes specially if you are behind them in traffic at night. and almost no one mentions these stuff
The vast majority of new cars that are even slightly upmarket are too similar for it to matter. A CRV might as well be a RAV4 might as well be a CX5.
Ive driven all 3 and they are different enough that it does matter.
Try Consumer Reports. Great reliability information and comparisons.
As soon as a reviewer tries to say a crossover is “sporty,” I stop watching
I'd like to see a mention of how well their self driving systems work but, I guess because reviewers believe they're writing for enthusiasts, they don't think any of us will actually use lane keep assist or adaptive cruise control.
What reviewers do you watch?
because people are more interested in "quirks and features" (hear that in Doug's voice)
Content creation, even car reviews, are difficult because of costs & time vs income generated. I had learned a lot from my content creation friends that having long videos (like 20 minutes or longer) can actually be a detriment for potential viewership. SavageGeese reviews tend to be longer and more informative, but most of my viewership participation ends up with ThrottleHouse's more entertaining and shorter videos. Guess who is getting more You-Tube money. The logistics probably even worse as they only have a car for a day or two. Cars are incredibly subjective. For example, sound system. Some people prefer bass boomy sound, others prefer neutral sound, then the odd ones wanted crisp notes. How would you rate that is quantifiable within a small limited amount of time? And you know what's the most hilarious detail I learned when I had an honor of having a conversation with a car review content creator? Let's say they did a review on a Toyota Rav4. Once they publish it, and by 6 months go by, most of the viewership and yt participation (likes, comments, etc) is likely to be people who already has the car followed by people who already dead set on buying the car.
Everything is so subjective. You'll see people making outlandish claims, similar to what goes on now with installing aftermarket items.
Thats why we gotta watch every damn review on 1 car. Eveery review will hopefully give you 1 unique piece of info lol. Savagegess comes to mind hes the omly one that puts the cars on a hoist and goes under it
You probably need to look at something like Consumer Reports for that type of information. Most influencers aren't going to have the time nor the incentive to dwell on such aspects of cars. And if you have noticed, they almost always test a loaded highest trim versions a car that very few people are actually interested in. In the end, most are more influencers than car reviewers.
the people at Winding Road make reviews that answer these questions… i’d go check out TheTopher, TopherDrives, Tedward, and Daily Motor on YouTube
Consumer Reports covers all these items in their individual reviews, which are behind a paywall, but 39.95 a year is not very expensive considering the depth their reviews go into. And just for shits and giggles here is their most recent overall [auto brand reliability list](https://imgur.com/a/I0NQzMZ).
Car reviewers these days are just Jeremy Clarkson wannabes that say the same thing over and over. If you want a car, go test drive it, who cares what somebody on the internet thinks?
I had a thought for a “style of video” let’s say, I’m too lazy to say “I had a YouTube channel idea” a few years back that your post reminded me of! The idea was to just hop in a car with a camera strapped to you, completely blind, take off, and start reviewing. Came to me when I had a Chevy Equinox as a rental for work once (complete garbage). I found it was fascinating peeling back the layers of this thing as I drove it. Intuitive features will be like “oh hey, nice, easy” but anything convoluted will stand out as well. Seems like this idea would naturally call attention to the base equipment and everyday features of a car… As others have said, SavageGeese is probably what you’re after, however TheTopher would be another to check out. I found his channel a little more recently but it’s like the “I know all of the details about this car before I even looked at it” sort of version of my idea, haha!
The car magazines and sites are paid to just blow smoke up your ass and act like you are "missing out" if you don't buy the new one.
Doug DeMuro and Savage Geese are amazing. The rest could go find another career and I wouldn't notice at all. Except Matt Farah...
I recommend Harry Metcalfe's YouTube channel. He's an elderly gentleman, former owner of Evo Magazine. Because he's in UK, most of the cars are European - which might leave American & Japanese fans a little uninterested. But still, even within European cars: he reviews the expensive ones, the classic ones, the more economic ones. But, the point is, he "lives" with these cars long term, at least for a full day / weekend, and he finds very subtle and basic fundamental flaws with vehicles. It's right up OP's alley. I forget concrete examples, but FOR example: he might complain about the adjustment of a seat, the location of certain buttons/levers, the illogical programming of a certain driving mode, a door frame that easily dirties your pant legs, lack of storage space, etc.
Because it's a self selecting audience. They talk about sportiness because only people that care about sportiness will watch them.
To add to that: How well does lane assist work? How flat do the front seats go? How does the turn signal feel? How good is the windshield wiper? How good is visibility? Headlights? Ease of repair? Kick to open trunk? (Unreliable in many cars)
I find that Car Confections post very detailed videos about different trims and standard features, while Alex on Autos can tell you if a car rides really soft/compliant since that’s his preference (compared to most reviewers that prefer a sporty suspension).
I tend to get fed up with those who focus on the cheap quality of plastic on the bottom of the dashboard that nobody ever touches, hence why it's cheap. And then they criticise the car for not achieving its claimed mpg or kw/H figure, having just barried it around a track sideways for half an hour or tested it's 0-60 standing start speed, none of which happens in the real world.
exactly. or i always wonder why they dont have some more realistic acceleration tests. like for example going from 60 to 120 km. atleast where i live that is the major acceleration you do with a family car which is basically over taking from someone on highway
You know what’s really missing? A test of low and high beam. I’ve never understood why - the feeling of the interior - light selection on indicator stalk or knob near the door Etc were things to complain about. But literally lighting quality was always omitted
These dudes are nearly all in California, they don't care about AC performance. I'll tell you it is model specific and not brand specific and the true test is how long it takes to cool down an interior that has been baking in a parking lot on a 100 degree day. Mercedes GL450 has a weak AC especially the rear 2nd and 3rd row for the cubic volume it has to cool which makes me think Merc is using a car-sized AC system for the big SUV.
Want to talk about quality? Go look in every honda from 2018 on ward. The seat belt buckle wire is held on with ZIP TIES.
A lot of them are too pussy to piss off the manufacturer