Yuan Qicong: "I can prove myself completely. It's too much. I've decided to fight back!"

Some netizens say: Let's set a standard for car evaluations as soon as possible...

To support Yuan's "impartiality", is it true that Xiangjie S9 is inferior to Mercedes in flying ramp tests?

Some netizens cannot bear to watch, lamenting that there are too many "fake evaluations" now, and the results depend on whether the influencers are genuine or fake.

Let's rewind to August 20th, when million-follower influencer Yuan Qicong posted a short video titled "Xiangjie S9, Somewhat Disappointing" (currently deleted).

In the video, Yuan Qicong conducted a flying ramp test of the Xiangjie S9 on a public road.

However, Yuan expressed disappointment with the significant fluctuations, bumpy turns, and inability to maintain a straight line during the test.

Some professional netizens noticed that during the test, Yuan accelerated through the ramp, further pressing the accelerator midway.

More importantly, there was an excessive steering movement during the drive.

At the same time, the netizens' doubts were promptly addressed by Xiangjie S9's official data.

On August 25th, Xiangjie Automobile issued a statement stating that based on platform data and video analysis, the "test" (video segment 29:14-29:19) occurred around 12:42 on August 16th, 2024, with a speed of 63km/h. Before the wheels lifted off, the accelerator was at 28.8%, and the steering wheel turned 23 degrees to the right, detecting a torque of 1.96Nm. Subsequently, the steering wheel turned left and returned to center. If the steering wheel turned due to vehicle issues, it would have turned opposite to the detected torque direction. In this "test," the driver actively intervened, turning the steering wheel right then left, causing the vehicle to yaw. Under the same conditions, after multiple retests without driver intervention, the Xiangjie S9 maintained a straight line.

After data analysis and multiple retests, Xiangjie Automobile concluded that Yuan's findings were not objective or rigorous, misleading consumers.

Put simply, Uncle Yuan deliberately slandered the Xiangjie S9.

Is that true?

Immediately, Uncle Yuan held a live stream that night to clear his name, angrily stating, "This is a car. Continuously manipulating the steering wheel with one's hand is not an error. This logic is absurd."

However, shortly after the live stream ended, Yuan Qicong's Weibo account was muted by the official account.

Could Uncle Yuan's "fake evaluations" really be problematic?

The blogger believes: First, Yuan Qicong's team, which conducts evaluations, is undoubtedly a professional testing team (evident from Lei Jun's visit to their company). Second, the testing location was carefully selected and prepared for filming, as evidenced by the first-time capture of the test video. Finally, after the jump, the S9 and 001 indeed operated differently, with the S9 making an obvious steering movement while the 001's brake lights flickered.

Regarding these three points, everyone can judge the fairness of Uncle Yuan's video for themselves.

In fact, this is not the first confrontation between Beijing Automotive Group (BAG) and Yuan Qicong.

In the second half of last year, Yuan Qicong publicly apologized for his controversial remarks about BAG's ARCFOX brand.

Interestingly, ARCFOX's legal department, which had not been active on Weibo for a long time, opened an account solely to send a notification letter to Yuan Qicong.

Image source: Weibo

Shortly after receiving the notification letter, Yuan Qicong posted a response on his Weibo account stating, "The controversial video was not a rigorous car test. It indeed contained inappropriate wording that could easily cause misunderstanding. Your criticism is justified, and I apologize to the misunderstood car owners and ARCFOX."

However, unlike this time, Yuan's Weibo account was not muted after his previous apology.

Why did BAG act so swiftly, precisely, and harshly this time?

As everyone knows, the sales of Xiangjie S9 will directly impact BAG's success in advancing its new energy vehicles, leaving no room for error.

Even Zhang Yong, the head of BAG, emphasized at the Xiangjie S9 launch event that BAG would prioritize Xiangjie S9 as a core strategic vehicle, allocating group resources to support its entry into the executive luxury car market.

At the event, he even redefined the soul of an automaker: It is not about stagnation but about meeting consumer needs through open cooperation.

Meanwhile, the newly appointed head of BAG, Zhang Yong, urgently needs this achievement.

More importantly, Yu Chengdong needs to prove that HarmonyOS Intelligent Driving can succeed not only in Wenjie but also in many other brands like Xiangjie, Zunjie, and Aojie.

Could unscientific evaluations that disrupt GQ's normal operations go unpunished?

Looking back at recent car industry evaluation controversies, each incident reveals the anxiety surrounding industry development.

Although automakers repeatedly emphasize "healthy competition" and reject "malicious attacks," can they truly adhere to these principles?

So, are these "fake evaluations" purely technical verifications? Perhaps only the automakers themselves can provide the answer.