Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I trusted CR until they reviewed product of which I am a specialist in. They got it 100% wrong in that case.
But when it comes to vehicles, I would put SOME stock in them...and some in the large numbers of reports they get of repairs needed. They get those from actual consumers.
Example - I liked the 2010 Passat - but VW often gets low marks from CR. However, I looked up the repair on that particular model, transmission and engine. It appeared that the reports got better with each model year meaning VW had greatly improved the quality control. So I bought one and it has been perfect for 6 years.
As with most data - add it to the other data and then process it with your brain to get the proper results.
I don't necessarily buy only cars with the red circles, I will buy white, and I definitely avoid the ones with black.
There is so much information on the Internet (yes much of it is BS) one can easily check out reliability, pricing, etc. of anything. CR may have outlived its usefulness.
while I agree that there is a lot of other sources for the same info, keep in mind that CR is the only one that does not take money from manufacturers, not even in the form of advertising, banner ads etc
there are lots of sites that will provide a review of a car, but they are unable to predict reliability based on that test drive.... you need research and data to do that
for test drive reviews.... CR is the pits...... for reliability data..... it's the best source available anywhere
I put absolutely zero stock in Consumer Reports. Back in college, we studied them extensively (I have a Mass Comm degree). They have a long history of skewing results to suit their own needs.
What are "their own needs? "
As has been already discussed in this thread, there is a difference between their subjective reviews of individual cars and the objective historical data they provide on model problems. Are you saying that they skew the historical data as well?
OP. If it's an older model, I would go by repair and complaint reports rather than trusting any advertiser-paid consumer reports. Like everything else in our nation anymore, few recommendation reports are exempt from personal or corporate biases.
Not to be sarcastic but, if it's a totally new vehicle model you're looking at, no one knows how the car or truck will perform over the long haul except perhaps Nostradamus.
i was looking thru the April auto issue a few weeks back (my parents still subscribe to the magazine) and they've actually changed their scoring this year. They have 2 now: a road-test score that incorporates performance, braking, handling & ride quality/noise intrusion; and a Overall score that also encompasses reliability & safety & owner satisfaction.
Personally i think that ppl need to go out & test drive & even borrow/rent prospective cars to find out what you like & don't like. Some ppl prefer soft floaty rides. Others want big windows with smaller rear pillars. Still others want a bulky vehicle that makes them feel cocooned & protected.
For automotive information, I ONLY trust their repair history data, and only as a starting point to dig deeper. Their opinions of cars are extremely biased. I remember they bashed every small truck made (this was in the 80s and 90s) because they had "a too-firm ride." Well, DUH, it is a truck. The car reviews gushed over cushy (mushy) suspensions. Big thumbs down to CR for being fat old farts who just want rolling sofas.
Then there was the fraudulent testing and hatchet job on Samurais. No, CR cannot be trusted.
^^This. All the Consumer reports articles I've read on cars place a high value on "ride quality." Basically, they weren't happy with a vehicle unless it had a very soft suspension.
I would consult CR, but take their reviews with some grains of salt. I think they are fairly good judges of whether cars are priced fairly for what you get in them.
After reading a bad point of "it was too easy to spin the tires" in a review of a car I once had...I relegated CR to the wastebasket of idiocy. No kidding that a powerful V8 will spin a tire or two, duhhhh.
Consumer Reports makes me roll my eyes most of the time because they seem to have a clear bias towards Honda and Toyota.
I didn't know that the highly praised Chevy Impala and Chevy Malibu were from Honda or Toyota. OTOH CR's review and rating for the newly designed 2012 Honda Civic was so bad that Honda brought out a redesigned model in just 18 months, or less than half the normal amount of time: article
Quote:
Originally Posted by nws2002
...CR tends to prefer boring but reliable vehicles that will safety get you from point A to point B. They don't seem to understand that people buy vehicles for any other reason and that their reviews should be a bit more in-depth and include other variables.
CR's scoring system is based on what they think is the ideal family sedan should be, and they don't change their scoring for sports cars, SUVs, trucks, etc. They freely admit this. OTOH this doesn't affect their rankings within any catagory of vehicle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nws2002
It also irritates me about how impartial they claim to be in everything. Ummm...no. We all have our own biases and no one is impartial. I get that they buy the products, which makes them less likely to trump up a product just because they were given it for testing, however they are clearly partial to certain brands if you read their reviews for a few years.
Actually CR tries hard to be impartial and requires their reports to be screened by multiple oversight committees.
The fashion aspects of vehicles are too personal for an organization like Consumer Reports, although they do comment on them (rating score not affected) and do present many photos, including the always-useless ones of the instrument panel (too small to read details) and the pitch black photos of the interiors.
OTOH CR's written reports and videos are about the same as those from car magazines, Edmund's, KBB, etc., and their last several annual auto issues left out way too much information, such as city fuel economy and anything to do with rear seating room, and as usual they assumed that cargo room should be measured with none of the rear seats folded down.
I put no weight on the garbage they print. I enjoy reading about cars in car magazines, because the best information on cars comes from journalists who write only about cars and trucks, not toasters, towels, microwaves, and refrigerators.
Consumer Reports has far more people who deal only with cars than any commercial car magazine does, and unlike those magazines, they don't allow their people to take bribes from the car industry -- most car journalists work as "consultants" for manufacturers, even when they're not race drivers or engineers. Davis Davis: "I'll make a speech to anybody for $5,000." Here's the American Journalism Review's report on conflicts of interests: article
Similarly, Consumer Reports' articles about men's and women's suits aren't as interesting to read as those in GQ, Vogue, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by james777
On another note, wasn't there a scandal some years back about how companies had to pay to have their products reviewed in Consumer Reports?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
