Quick Poll: Car Craft Cover Design

you want circulation numbers....t&a.......tried an true  

Love it, love it, love it.  Like the other guys said, bring back the "no bling" clip art...Keep the action covers coming too.  Nothing grabs attention like a hot rod or musclecar in action, burnouts rock, wheelstands rule.  Keep up the awesome work...  

Damn, good eye! After you mentioned it, I went back and looked again, and found the quote near the center. Sorry Freiburger!

Big, but I agree with about 1/4 instead of a 1/3.

Also, we need more cover pictures of sandal wearing hippies holding bleach bottles and doing Duster burnouts behind the shop at 2AM.

Just a thought.

Freiburger,

Welcome Back!   Now you can finish the 455 wagon build-up!  Why not throw the heads from the 500 hp small-block on the White Bird and call it "Formula for Disaster"  bigger injecters and have Tom Habrzyk weld up a crazy long runner manifold.   Try for 500 LBS of torque/550 HP.  Remember the Mopar Cross-Ram?  What about that design with a thoughly widdled eldebrock lower, dual Viper thottle bodies and a FAST controller.  The new cover and magazine layout is cool.  Keep the CC quickies coming and a final thought; Why not use the Bird to combine all the best of CC - Light wieght (remember the hacked caddy?),  handleing like the cheap street, take it to Bonneville and shoot for 200 like the old granitelli camero, 11 second 1/4's and get someone to draw up a new paint/sheet medal combo to make it look killer.  Hey I can't afford the quarters that my '69 Lemans needs but for the price of the parts I could be crusin in some fast clean sheet metal.

Keep it real!

Jim

Denver

Big!

And put beaters (duh!) on the cover..rust rules!

Dents and faded enamel jobs from 1982!

Air shocks and N-50's!

I like it better with this months twin turbo blurb on top!

On my local newsstands, the only thing that shows now is the H-U-G-E logo.  That's good for regular readers (although why they don't subscribe at the give-a-way price of $10/year is a mystery) but probably not so good for the ignorant youngsters who have no idea of what CC is.

At least CC's logo is bigger than Super Street's!

"you want circulation numbers.....t&a..........tried an true"

Old[s]man, I don't think they're talking about increasing THAT kind of "circulation." [insert "diving board 'boing'" sound effect here]

Seriously, if CC wants LOWER circulation numbers and [make that "an"] fewer legitimate advertisers, they will pack the book with useless and gratuitious "t&a."  If you were even close to right, "Autobuff" would have become the #1 car mag on the planet, instead of the butt of jokes. 

Clearly, "t&a" is not the Viagra (R) of automotive publishing, notwithstanding the apparent need of a few sleazy old guys to froth over air-brushed photos of barely-legal chicks . . . . Chicks who wouldn't give these dried-up geezers even a glance (unless lured by a fist full of "singles!")

CC should be about "hard core" CAR CRAFTING tech,  not "hard core" "t&a" . . . Performance parts, not body parts!  "Off the Rack" is already too much space wasted on moronic "t&a."

Perhaps wantabe "Hefs" should learn the "ROPES" of car magazines before offering up any more flaccid advice.

If "rust rules," why not just put some of the basket case junk on the cover from Magneto's "glorious" photo spread of a couple of months ago?

Air shocks and "N-50s" were just the idiotic neon and Boeing Wing excesses of '70s posers (the clueless parents of today's ricers).   Why not bring back vans, too? (where N50s and air shocks were often found conspiring together).

"Affordable Street Performance" ought to be FIRST about PERFORMANCE--not about building jacked-up rustbucket clown cars that run WORSE than a econobox!

Keep the Covers coming the way they are! It's the best I've seen CC since the mid 80's!  

Ok Pontiac Quack...Lets ask Frieburger which issues sell more on the newstands...One with a girl on the cover or one without?...I used to buy Autobuff and liked it...although not for the cars too much...and I agree I don't want topless girls in CarCraft...But lets be honest here.... A pretty girl on the cover will sell more issues than one without...what do ya say David..... Am I all wrong here? - clue me in! I'm SURE that Primedia keeps stats on such things......?  

Oh yeah - pray tell... why does HotRod do a swimsuit issue..or vote for sexiest female driver......Huh? Because they want ridicule from prudes like you?...No. they sell magazines. Whether you like it or not. And David has been around allot longer than most editors of these rags...I'm sure Primedia wouldn't keep relying on his excellent editorial skills if he couldn't "post the numbers"   Keep selling those Mags David!...Girls an cars just go together.  

Hey Pontiac Quack - I want to know your opinion of that GTO in the readers rides video section....... Its REAL important to me...........................................................................................  

New style, hand's down. And keep "The rack" too!!!

"I used to buy Autobuff and liked it"

That admission just about says it all.

The balance of your posts repeat most of what John Pearly Huffman wrote in April when he was explaining why HRM wasn't doing another bikini bimbo spread.  http://hotrod.com/racers/

Of course, TV Guide, TIME,  AARP Magazine, and Readers Digest reportedly have more subscribers than CC, but I don't hear anybody demanding TV listings and articles on non-automotive subjects under the thin guise of broadening CC's sales base.   So it's not just about raw numbers--it's the quality of those numbers that is at issue. 

If G-stringed-chicks-as-hood-ornaments was THE magic sales bullet, all car magazines--and even all auto-related advertising-- would feature this sort of "t&a" EVERY MONTH!  And some Lowrider/Biker mags would most certainly rule the sales charts.

But while occasional "swimsuit" issues may temporarily "pump" newsstand sales, I'm certain that a steady diet of such useless "cheesecake" would in the long run cut resubscription rates among those who (a) buy magazines for relevant tech and build ideas, (b) concerned parents who buy subscriptions for their car-crazy kids, (c) school libraries (yep, I read my first CC in the library as a youngster), (d) husbands who get tired of fighting with their wives over "that #%$& porno car mag" he reads in the can, and (e) the few women Car Crafters who get tired of women being objectified and stereotyped as empty-headed bimbos or "racing trophies." 

Furthermore, even if "swimsuit" issues temporarily increase sales, they typically don't attract QUALITY readers for advertisers.  Readers who pick up a mag only for some airbrushed, three-quarters nude airhead on the cover aren't really serious Car Crafters (otherwise, they would have bought/subscribed to the mag anyway FOR THE TECH INSIDE) At least the "Real Women of Hot Rodding" featured women knew more than where to put in the gas and who had earned their chops in some sort of automotive activity.   And the vast majority of the photos were very tasteful.  Besides, the voting was for the "favorite"  Real Woman of Hot Rodding , not the "sexiest." 

A few months ago MM&FF ran "Jessie Jane" or some other hideously scanky "porn star" in a bikini on the cover. They got shelled with negative feedback. They haven't done it since, which could mean one of the following: Jim Campisano doesn't have any more roached-out porno queens in his little black book or MM&FF DOESN'T WANT TO OFFEND SOME OF ITS READERS AND ADVERTISERS.  (MM&FF does publish a newsstand-only annual special with scads of chicks for those hapless losers who feel the insatiable urge to fantasize about other men's cars and girlfriends).

"Off the Rack" wastes pages which could be better used for more tech articles, readers rides or quality car features. I seriously doubt anyone buys CC to get the latest scoop on what freebie T-shirt Bobbi Sue Luther is wearing this month.

Legitimate car magazines have an ethical obligation to present a positive, truthful, and family-friendly image of our hobby.  Turning CC into "FHM" or "Maxim" with a few cars on the side doesn't meet this obligation and is a disservice to loyal (and mature) subscribers. 

BTW, if Freiburger was so autonomously omniscient, why did he ask for our opinion in the first post on this thread? Hmmm?