We're a little behind schedule this week, juggling multiple projects, so we thought we would take a few minutes to answer some questions we are frequently asked.
 How Long Does It Take You To Write These Articles?
When we first started writing these, it didn't take that long -- a couple of hours -- but as we became more rigorous with research, photographs, and so forth, the time involved keeps increasing. Usually, researching and writing the articles (which at this point average 3,500 words in length) is at least a full day's work. That doesn't include taking and editing our own photos, or locating and obtaining clearances for other people's photos, which can also be quite time consuming. Actually preparing the article for publication (inserting photos and links, etc.) can also take more than two hours. As of 2010, the typical preparation time for these articles is 20-25 hours.
How Do You Know All This Stuff?
As several of our friends will testify, we have a terrifying amount of information in our head. (Our friends Bob and Greg once went with us to the Automobile Driving Museum in El Segundo, California, and watched in amusement as we proceeded to lecture the docent on the origins of each car on display.) Still, we have to do a lot of research to get our facts straight. If we can, we strongly prefer to use first-hand accounts: interviews with or reminiscences by people actually involved with the creation of the cars. Auto industry people don't seem to be big on memoirs, unfortunately, but we have found a number of useful sources:
- In the 1980s, David Crippen, from the Henry Ford Archives, interviewed a number of leading automotive designers. We do not have access to the Benson Ford Research Center in Michigan, where the full transcripts are stored, but some are available online here.
- Back issues of Hemmings' Special Interest Auto magazine. This long-running magazine, which was eventually folded into several other Hemmings publications, was launched in 1971, featuring profiles of interesting collector cars. In its early days, SIA's editor, historian Michael Lamm, often included interviews with the surviving engineers and designers, many of whom are no longer with us.
- HowStuffWorks's Auto channel. We find that HSW's articles are highly variable in quality. Some are quite thin, but others, drawn primarily from older publications by Consumer Guide/Publications International (which was absorbed by HSW several years ago) are rich with behind-the-scenes detail.
- Older magazine articles, particularly Car and Driver, from when the vehicle was first released. The release of a much-heralded model is sometimes accompanied by small interviews or profiles of the designers and engineers, which are often useful. Car and Driver was once an excellent source for such interviews, because of its commentators' acerbic wit and willingness to ask difficult questions -- qualities that have, in our opinion, eroded badly in recent years.
- Books like Dave Holls and Michael Lamm's A Century of Automotive Style: 100 Years of American Car Design or Pete Lyons' excellent survey of Ferrari, Ferrari: The Man and His Machines. Another very useful study of the auto industry is David Halberstam's 1986 opus The Reckoning, which is sadly out of print. One must be careful with books -- there are a lot of automotive references that are little more than coffee-table books, with pretty photography and little substance.
- The occasional well-researched enthusiast site. We are wary of these, because they tend to be colored by brand favoritism and press-office spin, but we have found some (particularly by European enthusiasts, like Rene Winters) that have gathered a lot of useful information, sometimes including articles and interviews that are otherwise hard to find.
(Please note that Ate Up With Motor is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, and earns advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.) Why Are Your Articles So Long?
We occasionally ask ourselves the same question. We sometimes start what we think is going to be "a short one this time," only to realize with exasperation that the word count has again topped the 3,000 mark. It appears to be inevitable.  The sheer length of these articles is in stubborn defiance of conventional wisdom about web content, which insists that shorter is better, and that 800-word articles are long for the web audience. That may be true, but as readers, we really despise 500- to 800-word articles. A 500-word article is unlikely to tell us anything we didn't already know. An 800-word article might contain a useful point or two, but unless it's on a very narrow, specific topic (for example, the workings of a De Dion suspension, rather than automotive suspensions in general), it's probably going to be pretty thin. Also, let's be honest: if you just wanted a 500-word overview of a popular car, you could find it elsewhere. It would probably be pithier, with prettier pictures. We like to think that if you stick around to read these overviews, it's because they're in-depth, and because they have something to say, which many coffee-table histories or online encyclopedia entries do not. Have You Ever Thought About Doing an Article About...
The answer to this question is usually, "Maybe..." We choose what articles to write based mostly on two things: 1) what sounds interesting right now and 2) what we have photos for. We got some pictures last summer of a 1965 Plymouth VIP, and so one of these days, you're going to get a story about the VIP, whether you like it or not... We would love to write about, say, a Lamborghini Miura, but we have no photos of a Miura right now, so that may be further off.
You Seem to Have Weird Tastes in Cars. What Do You Actually Like?
We have confessed in recent months that we do not particularly like retractable hardtops (heavy, complex, expensive, troublesome), or exotic sports cars (gaudy, vulgar, impractical), or convertibles (noisy, drafty, lacking in structural integrity -- plus, we have very short hair, and are prone to sunburning our scalp).  Here are five cars we particularly like, in no particular order:
- 1970s BMW 3.0 CS: We are very fond of the late-model BMW E9 coupes (2800 CS/3.0 CS/3.0 CSi), which are among the prettiest shapes BMW has ever offered. They are a useful size, reasonably practical, and satisfying to drive, if not particularly fast by modern standards. Their main drawbacks include poor rust protection, marginal cooling capacity (particularly on federalized versions), and a worrisome lack of spare body panels, which can make restoration or ownership a challenge.
- 1992-1995 Lexus SC/Toyota Soarer: These Lexus coupes, styled in Toyota's CALTY design center in California, were a stunning refutation of the idea that Japanese automakers couldn't offer compelling designs. The SC's bullet-like styling stands comparison with any contemporary 2+2, unique without the in-your-face vulgarity that often characterizes provocative-looking cars. My choice would be a toss-up between the SC300, which used the DOHC inline-six from the Toyota Supra (sadly not offered stateside with the twin-turbo engine available in the home market), and the SC400, which shared the LS400 sedan's silky V8. They are quite reliable, too, so owning one is not the wallet-torturing experience that some of their European rivals can be.
- 1960 Cadillac Eldorado Seville: Less iconic than the '59 Caddy, but a cleaned-up version of the same body shell, backing off the glitz just enough to emphasize a bold, confident basic shape, including a lovely pillarless roof treatment that looks more like a fighter canopy than a car. For us, this is the quintessence of postwar Cadillacs, all 19 feet and two and a half tons of it.
- 1995-2005 Alfa Romeo GTV: Deeply flawed but highly tempting Italian coupe, never sold in the U.S. A hassle to own -- even if the electrical problems don't drive you mad, needing a $700 cambelt change every 30,000 miles gets old in a hurry -- but provocative styling and some of the world's most charismatic engines still entice. Most desirable would be a V6 (which includes better brakes, as well as the bigger engine) with one of the vividly colored Momo interior packs. We wouldn't own (or recommend) a GTV as an only car, but even seeing pictures of it sets off waves of covetousness.
- 1966 Plymouth GTX: Keep your GTOs and Shelby Mustangs; if we're to have a sixties American Supercar, we'll take the square-rigged, big-engined GTX. Basically a standard Belvedere/Satellite intermediate stuffed with heavy-duty suspension and Chrysler's largest engine: 440 cubic inches (7.2 liters, for the metrically inclined), linked to the dependable TorqueFlite. We acknowledge that the GTX is far from the sexiest car of its era, but it has a sturdy, no-nonsense character that we find very appealing. Its main debits -- hopelessly inadequate tires and brakes, a comically gargantuan thirst for fuel -- are no worse than most of its contemporary rivals. Sadly, the auction fever of recent years pushed the price of these cars well beyond reason, but perhaps they'll become more affordable as the economy bottoms out. We can dream...
# # #
|
Nice to know how these articles are written, considering that it is weekly and it is probably difficult to do.
I agree very much with you: I hate exotic cars. ( like Ferrari or a European supercar. ) I particularly like the big American cars, like that 1960 Caddy you just mentioned. That car is just big and beautiful, and I hope I get to own one...
...and I like the full size Ford Galaxies with their big 427 ( or was it 406 ? ) engines and the Impala SS 409, all typical full size muscle cars.
The Plymouth VIP article that were gonna get is going to be interesting...