Oh well, it must be great then.
I don't think I've ever seen a bad review of a car in a pre-production test. They're a mutually beneficial back-rub.
I don't know, if there have been pre-tests/pre-drives before with a generally negative verdict... but since the whole concept of pre-drives is rather new, there is not much to look back to.
Regarding the specific pre-drive event of the G8x:
- it took place on a race track
- journalists drove G8x and F8x Comp.(which up-to-date was still class benchmark) back to back
- their unisono statement: G8x more planted, more accurate, better turn in, ...
Yes, sure: This pre-test does not replace a detailed instrumented test! As detailed as some of the hardcore magazines are used to do.
For many journalists it might have been especially enlightening as they do rarely track tests and never have the chance of a real back-to-back test.
BUT: There were lots of magazines/journalists with good reputation at this event, which later on had written those verdicts I cited above.
I think there is less likelyhood, that all of a sudden they write something contrary? E.g. " what a let-down is the G8x - much less sporty, agile, performing, ... than its predecessor"
So I tend to follow
@dalab here: The outcome of this pre-drive event is rather a positive sign. You can't just wipe that off the table as "favourably slanted articles" in sum.