I remember distinctly the excitement that came from the buff books a few years ago when the Mazda6 debuted. They praised not only its Zoom-Zoom handling, but also it's sporty looks that flew in the face of Camrys (by the way, I'm ready to start the discussion about the pluralization of proper nouns according to the conventions of the English language, changing this to "Camries"--please leave your thoughts in the comment section) and Accords.
The following is an excerpt from a 2004 Autoblog review of the Mazda6: "...The 6 hatch has all the Mazda traits we love like crisp handling, decent power and a very upscale feel to the interior. ...As far as sedans go it still outdoes most of the competition in the looks department."
But I just read a first-drive review from same of the all-new '09 model, and it's as if the first generation missed the mark completely: "We didn't exactly feel tingly with the last model (the MazdaSpeed6 would be the exception), so we walked out to the new car with key in hand to see if we are going to be feeling 'it' with the new car."
And this gem: "...The [new] 6 doesn't look nearly as painfully boring as its predecessor."
This kind of phenomenon seems to happen fairly often with the motoring press. A car debuts, they drive it, they love it, then it ages. As soon as this happens, and they're able to compare it with the new hotness, these journalists proclaim, "We never thought it was that great anyway." C'mon, guys! Sure, maybe the new Altima and Accord have surpassed the 6 in power and possibly even dynamics, but when it hit the market you couldn't get enough of this sedan's sporty handling and its interesting compound eyes that made it not another Japanese snoozemobile.
I love reading Autoblog and plenty of other automotive journalism, but I'm calling shenanigans!
