Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83
But it's not as if every publication is expected to look at every piece of equipment on the car to make sure it is an OEM product. To quote Shawshank Redemption, "Really, how often do you look at a man's shoes?" Additionally, publications go by the spec sheet provided to them by the manufacturer, which clearly did not list the tires that aren't even factory options at this point. That is the shady part. It's obviously something that you can detect visually, but they're not exactly "staring them in the face" and certainly not the first thing you inspect.
I'm sure that if you look at a lot of tests done on cars with factory upgrades, they get the specs AND the price of those upgrades supplied from the manufacturer so they can cite that information in their review. Certainly the price isn't something that the tester is supposed to figure out on their own too. That's supposed to come from the manufacturer as well.
This. Thanks, DEEEEEEZNUUUUUUUUUTS!
*ahem* Rex, the phrase "pull the wool over their eyes" is synonymous which deception. Yes, the reviewer can walk up to a car and clearly see the tires. But if an automaker sends a publication a car for review with equipment that's not representative of the consumer product, one can deduce deception. Hence "trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the reviewers and the public". Has nothing to do with how well the reviewer can see the brand/model on the tire, really.