Autoweek

It has too many ads and not enough racing. TV programming is a week late and only covers everything NASCAR. What about other classes, like Australian Supercars, BTCC, DTM, etc.Not easy to read. Go back to when it was a weekly magazine.

I liked its "feel" better than the BIG ones, like Car & Driver, Road & Track, etc. Nice to have it on the kindle. No paper to dispose of, and re-presents itself every 2 weeks (I think), and the old one is gone.This was a free trial. I have no idea why it didn't morph into a longer term paid subscription. I expected some kind of notice with a choice to be made. Oh, well. Amazon SCREWS UP again.No kidding, there is NO Amazon customer service. If it can't be handled by a robot, forget it. Bezos should make better robots.

It is a shame that this magazine went from a weekly to a bi-weekly. I am still a fan and will continue to be a subscriber. It covers breaking news on new models, racing coverage and lots of other auto-based topics.I had an ongoing subscription since the beginning of time and about a year ago switched to the digital version. Even though there the portability of the digital version was enticing, I did not like reading the magazine on my iPad. The other problem was the size of the files for each magazine. With 50-100mb being the norm, you have to constantly delete issues and then download them again if you want to review an article.Amazon has a great magazine program so I came here to go back to my paper copies. Simple to order and renew.

Very disappointed, will not renew. Not the same magazine I got years ago. Too much about cars regular people could never afford.

I'd compare Autoweek to a diner in a changing neighborhood that has played with its menu a bit, but is most confident in and proudly features its meatloaf. Meatloaf is fine on occasion, but you get the sense that this magazine, despite being biweekly, is slightly behind on its coverage. But I get the sense that most of readers are meatloaf eaters, so I am sure their subscriber base is happy.Here are some compliments and complaints:Motorsports:I really appreciate the coverage of motorsports. The F1 coverage is pretty good, but aside from that, it's pretty US centric. Coverage is basically for stuff you can see on TV, plus a few niche US series. I'd like to see WRC, and LeMans covered more regularly. They waste a lot of space speculating over the future of the American Le Mans series, when there are real races going on now. I am no fan of NASCAR, so of course I'm going to say there's too much coverage. But they're getting and publishing frequent letters from readers on NASCAR fatigue.The coverage itself could use a bit of a refresh. Basically, it's a lot of text and then stock press photos. Some of these articles describe rankings, describe all sorts of scenarios for end-of-season points. I think a few simple graphics regularly included would help.Questionable choices:I think you want to review a broad range of cars, but I don't think it's necessary to waste time reviewing humdrum cars just because they're popular. The mag's recent Corolla review was zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz . . . (sorry) even apologetic about wasting two pages; it was a little weird, and they had to really stretch to find something exciting to say.The last issue I got was devoted to trucks and had 2 NASCAR chaps on the cover. Flipped through it, and it went right into the trash. Lots of stuff about comfortable seats. Riveting stuff.Creepiness:Quite a few issues have tried to interject some sex into the magazine. We got to get Courtney Force in her workout kit, and (Jenson Button, if that's your preference). I think there was some contest to win Miss Force's exercise picks. We also got a picture of a buxom Swedish teenager lifting up her shirt. I am not looking forward to any more of this nonsense. In a magazine that really likes its trucks and NASCAR, you get the creepy-old-man-leering-at-little-girls vibe.I've only been a subscriber for 4 months, so hopefully they'll correct this.Graphics:Hmm, I can't say there are really any graphics. It's a lot of text and press photos. Almost blog-like simplicity. There's a beautiful mag out there called Top Gear. Autoweek is a cheap mag, I know, and I don't expect anything that amazing, but a smattering of nice artistic shots would not hurt. The few non-press photos could have been taken with a camera phone.Other graphics accompanying reviews could be better. They need to consistently have a little summary graphic for each article. It's not that I am lazy about reading, but they do do a lot of writing, and all the key technical data are talked about over many pages. They need to be consistently included in a single exhibit.The new "autolife" section:As of the second installment, appears to have puffed out. Episode one featured Swedes and the aforementioned breast-baring teenage girls. Episode 2 was about being thrifty while looking at a bunch of old cars at Pebble Beach or something. We'll see if this improves.Scoops:Umm, there are none. I was expecting a biweekly magazine to try to do that. It looks like they mainly wait for press releases, and get their gossip from other mags and bloggers.Korea:The US is fueling the Korean auto industry, and a pretty hot topic, especially since Toyota and Honda decided that hopelessly boring was a better business model. Light, funky, Asian trubos are here to stay (for, well, 2 decades now--they're almost middle aged) and mainstream. I don't expect this to be the focus of this mag, but they need to balance this out with more regular attention on this segment. This is part of my "meatloaf" critique. But hey, I know more than any human being ever would need to about the Ford F150 now.At this point, I am inclined to let my subscription lapse.Update: Several more issues, and even more of creepy voyeurism. Now it's auto show girls. More space wasted on trucks. Still too much NHRA and NASCAR coverage. And they got scooped by everyone on several major redesigns. So I end up reading a lot of news I already knew about a few weeks ago. This can't end soon enough.

Fortunately I have always loved cars. I like how they look, how they handle, how comfortable they are, how they perform, what kind of gas mileage they get, and how they age. AutoWeek provides up-to-date information every two weeks rather than the other mags at once a month. I still subscribe to four monthly car magazines, but AutoWeek often beats them to the punch on new cars with their more frequent issuance.My wife prefers car magazines over girlie mags. After all, she wouldn't be upset if I came home with a new car.

Hit or miss. like the fact that its bi-montly but some issues don't have much interesting readable material. Some however do so its hit or miss. Do to the small size of the issues if you are not interested in the subjects it can be quite worthless sometimes. Good writing though and very broad subject matter (too broad for my liking but that's subjective)

Last year I spent about $100 on various magazine subscriptions on amazon. Motor Trend, C&D, R&T, AW, Automobile, PopSci, and a few others. $20 of that was the AW subscription- money well spent. Think about all of the things that you waste money on? Treat yourself to wonderful automotive journalism. Well worth the investment. $100 for 8 different magazines a month? So worth it. Don't think I'd recommend any of these automotive magazines over one or the other, you simply need to get as many as you can afford. AW is great because they are released twice a month so the information is a bit more up to date than some of the others. If you are into cars the way I am, I'd also recommend checking autoblog daily.