10 tricks that brands use to manipulate car tests and that journalists already know (and you should too)

After so many years dedicated to automotive journalism, I have attended an immense number of car presentations and tests. This has helped me to know the tricks that car brands use to make their models seem better in the hands of the press than in the real life of the buyer. And no, I'm not just talking about makeup: there are small tricks, and others not so small, that influence our tests.

Many of these things have a logical explanation, whether due to simple marketing, logistics, or safety issues. Others simply make me feel skeptical about what I'm testing and the perception I receive. I have seen most of them repeat over and over again, so here are the 10 most common ones told from experience, the ones you have surely suspected and some that you might not have imagined.

1. The wildcard of the "pre-series"

It's the most classic excuse. When something goes wrong, the brand tells you that "it's a pre-series unit". What does that mean? A pre-series unit is an early version made before the final production line is fully defined; they are used for internal testing, homologations, and presentations. Yes, they exist, and I have driven them, especially when the press presentation is before the commercial launch of the model.

But of course, if during the test you notice excessive vibration from the gear lever or you have noticed the creaking of a poorly adjusted trim, they immediately tell you it's pre-series as a synonym for "maybe they'll fix it". The excuse works because it's plausible, but the reality is that in most cases, the defect you have detected in that test car, even if it is indeed pre-series, is not corrected in the production model.

2. Those shoes aren't yours

Another classic trick is that the press car comes fitted with higher quality tires with the intention of improving grip, comfort, and consumption. It's legitimate for a brand to want to show the product in its best light, but it would be honest to indicate that clearly. The experience for the journalist is better than what the end user will have.

Therein lies the problem. The buyer discovers that the version they will find at the dealership comes with lower-end tires and they can't even fit better tires as an option. A cheaper tire with worse performance affects the driving sensations, I assure you.

3. Configurations and options that won't arrive in Spain

I have tested countless cars configured with packages or combinations that have never been available in Spain. This usually happens because the first units are prepared when the national ranges are not yet closed, and often the brand prioritizes a "global" configuration.

At international presentations, I have had units with upholstery, engines, color combinations, or equipment that sometimes are not sold in Spain. It's understandable, but it also creates a false expectation. Additionally, at some press events, it's not made clear which characteristics will not be available or will be different in the Spanish market.

4. Fully equipped... and a little more

Putting extras on a test car is normal and also very useful because the more equipment it has, the more things I can test and report on. But sometimes the units we drive have elements from the accessory list, meaning they are not factory extras.

This clouds the perception because we might think that this car has that equipment when in reality it is an accessory fitted later at the dealership that is purchased separately and incurs additional costs. Even worse is when the brand does not specify it, which often happens.

5. Tailored routes

At press presentations, the routes for the dynamic test of the car are designed. Sometimes, with the intention of hiding weaknesses: if a car has low performance, the route will be urban; if it is not agile in curves, the organization will send you on the highway. It's logical to a certain extent, but it makes you distrustful. Isn't it strange to test that SUV, which at the press conference they insisted stands out for its offroad capabilities, on a route that never leaves the asphalt?

More critically, sometimes there are also very short routes that do not allow for conclusions about consumption, long-term comfort, or behavior in different situations. At events, I have had to do routes of 5 kilometers entirely through the city, from traffic light to traffic light, which have barely served any purpose. One thing to acknowledge is that at most events, the routes are suggestions and allow you to make your own route as long as you arrive at the destination on time.

6. Ballast in vans and pickups

Sometimes, in tests of vans and pickups, we are given the unit to evaluate with load or ballast in the bed so that the suspension is more settled. With weight in the rear, the suspension lowers, the bounce is dampened, and the vehicle conveys a sense of stability that, without load, may not exist.

It makes sense because in vehicles of this type, driving with load is the reality of the customer. But, although it will be their most common use, it is also true that the average user will also make trips without load, and therefore I think it would also be useful to test the pickup or the van in those circumstances. A vacant van and a loaded one offer very different experiences and it would be good to explain both realities.

7. It's hard to judge aging

The units I have tested tend to be very new, logical since they are mostly very recent launches. It is rare to encounter units older than a year or more than 15,000 km on the odometer. This means that I almost always see everything when it is very new making it difficult to evaluate how the car ages.

Although experience allows me to intuit where a model may falter in the future, it is not possible to reliably check if noises will appear, if the plastics hold up, or if misalignments occur over time. Short-term tests are useful but incomplete by definition because it is not possible to give a complete verdict without being able to assess reliability and aging.

8. Basic versions don't exist

If you want to see how the most basic version of the model performs, good luck. The press fleets of brands are filled with top-of-the-line trims and the best sellers. Except for very rare exceptions, the entry-level versions are not available nor expected, limiting the real information for the buyer who can only afford the entry version.

Evaluating only the high versions can create a skewed image because a basic engine or equipment could be perceived with less refinement and generate a less positive experience. I believe it would be good to be able to test the low range to provide a more complete judgment of each model.

9. More power than it should

There were times when adjustments were made to press cars to benefit performance. Electronic tweaks or component replacements to increase performance and thus improve the impression that the journalist took away. It is part of the past and today, apparently, that practice is not being carried out. Still, the temptation may exist.

10. Co-driving and accompanied driving

In some presentations, the test format of a vehicle is not such, they propose co-driving: the car is driven by an engineer or brand driver, with the journalist beside them. It can also happen that the journalist is at the wheel but with someone from the brand accompanying them.

It makes sense in unique cars, prototypes, or competition versions. Sometimes it is valuable because they show you the limits, demonstrate behavior... and they also ensure that you won't break anything. It's not malicious, but it reduces independence because that accompaniment limits the tester's freedom and, subtly, guides the perception they receive.

So, are brands deceiving?

Not always. Many of these practices are marketing strategies, others a matter of logistics or costs. Logically, the manufacturer will try to show the best of their product and my job is to ensure that what I tell you resembles what you will find at the dealership.

When what is presented in the test does not reasonably correspond to what the buyer will experience, there is a lack of transparency that harms customer trust and journalist credibility. That is not good for anyone.

For automotive journalists, honesty is important; we must be a filter that separates reality from marketing. That is why in tests and reviews, I try to point out everything that could skew the experience. Ultimately, it is about clearly explaining what you are seeing and why to help you make the best purchasing decision.