the dougscore in downloadable format
so how does the dougscore work? There are 10 separate categories, and each is judged on a scale of 1 to 10, with “1” being worst and “10” being best, meaning the maximum possible score is 100. The ten categories are divided into two separate groups: “weekend” and “daily”. “weekend” categories measure a car’s appeal to enthusiasts; in other words, how much fun it would be to drive on the weekend. meanwhile, the “everyday” categories focus on the livability and practicality of a car.
each car is compared to all other cars and not just to its segment. That’s an important point because it means that these categories are not relative, but absolute: the car with the highest dougscore is the best overall car I’ve ever driven, and the car with the lowest is the worst. The car with the highest “weekend” score is the best enthusiast car I’ve ever driven; the car with the highest “daily” score is the most practical and livable car I’ve ever driven.
and yes, this means I’ll be comparing a hummer h2 to a ferrari 488; a trabant to a lamborghini huracan. the h2 will probably beat the others when it comes to practicality. The 488 and Huracan will win for everything else. the trabant will simply lose.
One thing to note: Since I primarily review performance cars and specialty cars, and since my personal opinion is that performance cars and specialty cars are the best cars, the dougscore is designed to target towards exciting cars. For example: If a car goes from 0 to 60 in more than 7 seconds, it gets a “1” for acceleration. that’s a reasonable time for a minivan, but I’m judging enthusiast cars, so most “regular” cars would probably end up with a low acceleration score, and most other “weekend” categories.
Another note about the dougscore: I can make slight modifications here and there after I’ve posted a review of the car. For example: A car may debut with an impressive level of features and equipment, only to be surpassed soon as the auto industry moves on and adds even more interesting items, which could result in a lower score for that car. I also suspect I’ll award “dougscore” awards at the end of the year, and then wipe the slate clean with definitions that constantly change each year, as cars continue to get faster and more advanced.
enjoy the dougscore. argue about the dougscore. insists that the dougscore is wrong. use the dougscore as a metric to buy your cars. use the dougscore as a metric to measure my idiocy. completely ignore the dougscore, if you want. get tired of typing “dougscore”. but whatever you do, it’s here, and it will give you a fuller picture of my thoughts on each car.
with that in mind, let’s go to the categories:
There are five “weekend” categories and five “everyday” categories. weekend categories focus on the car’s appeal to enthusiasts; In other words, how much would you like to drive the car for fun over the weekend? the categories are:
This one’s easy: what does the car look like? if it’s awfully ugly, like a ssangyong rodius, it gets a “1.” if it’s very ugly, like a pontiac aztek, it gets a 2. somewhat ugly cars (cough, honda civic type r, cough) get a 3, while unattractive cars get a 4. an average car gets a 5, while that cars that look a bit prettier (for example, the BMW 340i) get a 6. Numbers 7 through 10 are reserved for the most beautiful cars, and “10” goes to only the best: the Jaguar and -type and the gull-winged mercedes 300sl of the world.
yes, style is subjective; in fact, it’s probably the most subjective item on this list. If you don’t agree with my rating, please create your own rating system. if his name is keith, you can call him keithscore. I will not sue.
acceleration will be scored objectively, using published times from 0 to 60, as follows:
less than 3 seconds: 10 points
3.0 to 3.5 seconds: 9 points
3.6 to 4 seconds: 8 points
4.1 to 4.5 seconds: 7 points
4.6 to 5 seconds: 6 points
5.1 to 5.5 seconds: 5 points
5.6 to 6 seconds: 4 points
6.1 to 6.5 seconds: 3 points
6.6 to 7 seconds: 2 points
7.1 seconds ahead: 1 point
Unsurprisingly, the best cars will score a 10, while the worst will score a 1. A handling “1” will be reserved for the cars that actually feel dangerous to drive: the Trabants of this world. Unsafe, floaty, and lazy cars (the yoke, for example), would get a “2,” while even a large, modern SUV deserves a 3, since they at least feel relatively safe. A fairly standard family car would score a 5, while performance cars will compete for the top numbers. If I had to do ratings right now, I’d say the Lamborghini Huracan gets a “10,” the Shelby GT350R gets a “9,” the Ferrari California T gets an “8,” and the Honda Civic Type R gets a “7.”
the “fun factor” category is another one that is somewhat subject to my opinion and is based on how much fun the car is to drive. One way to think about it is this: If someone handed me the keys to all the cars I’ve reviewed, the ones with the highest fun factor scores would be the ones I drive first, and the ones with the lowest fun factor scores. would be those would drive the last.
The “cool factor” category is a combination of how cool the car is and how important it is. you can think of it as “how much attention can a car get?” and “how important is it to the automotive world: if you were creating a car museum, how likely are you to include this car in it?” But it’s not just about how much the car appeals to the masses: it’s also designed to reward cars that would catch the eye of enthusiasts in cars and cafes. Cars that earn 10 points here appeal to the masses and enthusiasts alike (think Jaguar XJ220 or Bugatti Veyron), while lower-scoring cars would be everyday rides like the Toyota Corolla and Honda Pilot. p>
Just as there were five “weekend” categories, there are five “everyday” categories, each examining how livable, practical, and financially sensible it would be to own the car. think of the daily categories as an answer to the question: how much would you like to drive the car every day?
functions are, once again, quite subjective. You could objectively measure it, but it would be a nightmare process that involves assigning a value to each feature and trying to figure out if each car offers it. Instead I’ll take a look at each car and decide how well equipped it is. only cars with the most innovative features score very highly in this category.
unsurprisingly, this category will hurt cars like the porsche 911 gt3rs and the new ford gt, which have simple, track-focused interiors, and so it does in the “everyday” group. Also, this category will hurt older cars without modern conveniences, since I’m judging them by today’s standards, rather than the standards of their time. For example, the 1990s Rolls-Royce Silver Spur I drove would probably only get a “4” or “5” for “Features” since its equipment isn’t impressive compared to modern vehicles.
comfort differs from features because this category is all about smoothness, ride quality, and luxury. The Ferrari 488, for example, has a lot of great features, so it would probably get a “7” in that category. But it’s not very luxurious, as it’s loud, hard to ride, and mediocre visibility, so it’s probably a candidate for a “4” or a “5” when it comes to comfort. Big winners in this category will be cars like the Rolls-Royce Wraith, Bentley Mulsanne, and the latest generation of luxury SUVs.
Quality is an important category for people who are really interested in buying every car, and I’m going to think about quality in a number of ways. The most important thing is the actual quality of the items in and around the car – does everything feel right? Has the car taken shortcuts in obvious areas? Is there rattling or shaking where there shouldn’t be?
These items will give high-end cars an edge, but then there’s the other part of quality: reliability. A car like the McLaren 570s might have a high quality interior, probably worthy of a “10” in this category, but will the mechanics and electronics last? even the mere perception of unreliability can drop a car’s score here, since we won’t know the reliability numbers for each vehicle; I’ll just have to guess based on what I think, what I hear, and what I’ve experienced.
Like acceleration, practicality will be based primarily on an objective standard that primarily considers cubic feet of cargo volume. it will be like this:
0 to 3 cubic feet: 1
3.1 to 6.5 cubic feet: 2
6.6 to 11 cubic feet: 3
11.1 to 16 cubic feet: 4
16.1 to 24 cubic feet: 5
24.1 to 34 cubic feet: 6
34.1 to 48 cubic feet: 7
48.1 to 64 cubic feet: 8
64.1 to 72 cubic feet: 9
72.1 cubic feet and up: 10
That being said, some cars can get ahead of their “cubic foot” class with a few tricks. For example, the Porsche 911 only has 4.7 cubic feet of cargo space, which would give it a “2,” but it does have rear seats and plenty of small storage pockets inside. that’s probably enough to move it up to the “3” category, even if it doesn’t have the storage volume of some of its “3” peers.
in addition, “practicality” will be the category that considers fuel economy. While the Mercedes GL63 AMG’s 93.8 cu. similar without the huge penalty in fuel economy.
Finally, this category considers how practical it is to use a car. For example, the Rolls Royce Phantom has good cargo space, but it wouldn’t be something you’d drive everywhere – it’s huge and draws a lot of attention.
Lastly, I’ll try to assign a number to “value”; In other words, if the car is worth its current market value. Value might be the hardest number to assess in this entire group, since it takes all of the above categories into account, but it’s also among the most important, since it’s the only category that really considers the price of the car. Yes, a half million dollar car can be a good value, if it excels at what it does and doesn’t depreciate radically. similarly, a $20,000 car can have low value if it’s unreliable, under-equipped, and subpar compared to rivals.