Just to add a little more info on how it generally works for most auto publications. Does it always work this way? Probably not in every instance. But this is common in the auto writing industry, from my reading.
Autoblog has a small paragraph at the bottom of all their reviews that explain how they get the cars.
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/04/2014-porsche-911-turbo-s-review-first-drive/
Quote:
Autoblog accepts vehicle loans from auto manufacturers with a tank of gas and sometimes insurance for the purpose of evaluation and editorial content. Like most of the auto news industry, we also sometimes accept travel, lodging and event access for vehicle drive and news coverage opportunities. Our opinions and criticism remain our own – we do not accept sponsored editorial.
Jalopnik also includes this type of thing in reviews to show how they get them:
http://jalopnik.com/2013-volkswagen-jetta-gli-the-jalopnik-review-1245582201
Quote:
(Full Disclosure: VW wanted me to drive the Jetta GLI so bad that they dropped it off near my house and then let me drive it wherever I wanted. I went to Lime Rock Park because vintage racing was happening and that's my [censored].)
I'm not going to claim this relationship with automakers- where they get the cars for free to test- does or doesn't influence testing results. I listen to the Autoblog podcast and the hosts definitely don't seem to go easy on cars they don't like. But, I can see how there could be influence one way or another.
CR buys all the cars they test, but they do take part in some first drive events and other manufacturer sponsored things. For example, I saw a first drive of the new Mazda3 by CR. That car isn't out yet, so that was a manufacturer sponsored thing. But, when they actually do the full review of the Mazda3 they'll buy a couple for the testing.
Anyway, being an auto nerd I read/listen to a lot of auto content from a lot of publications/websites.
