From: David_Schwartz 2:01 pm
To: ALL (1 of 2)


I have to say that I thought some of the comments about price comparisons in the latest issue were a bit unfair. You guys compared the TSX with the $2,000 Nav option to cars without that option (for example, suggesting that the TSX is $2,000 more than the Accord EX V6 without NAV). At points, you actually compared the TSX with NAV to other cars without NAV even though those vehicles can be so equipped (as in the case of the Accord, which would be about the same price as the TSX if equipped with NAV).

Overall, I thought the road test were amazingly accurate, and completely nailed each car perfectly (I say that as a TSX owner who has also driven all the other vehicles in the test). But, when you talk numbers, you should try to be fair about comparing equivalent levels of equipment.

Anyway, this is just a minor complaint about another superb set of road tests.



From: CR_Expert__Tom_Mutchler 2:11 pm
To: David_Schwartz (2 of 2)

1959.2 in reply to 1959.1

David, thanks for your kind words. You have a good point about the price comparsions in the Ratings - I'll pass that comment on.

Tom

 

Bug him until they decide to include a correction in next month's issue.

Nice work though.

 

Did you tell him that CR was spot-on in including the Accord and Passat in the "Sporty Sedan" category the TSX was placed in??

 

Hey, do you have a link to this article on their website (if you have a subscription)?
I would like to see this.
By the way, does anyone know when they are coming out with a more robust report on the TSX? Right now, they only have crash ratings and the factual information (0-60, horsepower, mpg, etc).

 

ummm.. the full review is what he is referring to, in the Nov 04 print edition.

edit: http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1097261704326

 

The Accord and the Passat are both competitive with the TSX in every domain except handling. CR noted that.

And, btw, I considered the Passat and Accord before buying the TSX and I suspect than many others here did as well.

Not saying I completely disagree with your point, but I also see why CR included those vehicles in their description.

 

I have a Passat v6. It is a great car, but not a sports sedan. I just don't think it belongs in a category that includes the BMW 330i. That category seems like a stretch.

 

I'm talking about the specific breakdowns, like this for the tsx:
http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1097262125860

for other cars, like the tl, they have this:
http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1097262132458

 

http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1097262537274

 

Hmm... either they JUST changed the page, or they have two different pages up. Here is the page I was looking for:
http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1097262466919

 

I don't think the TSX competes well with the BMW 330i either, to be frank. I do think, however, that the Passat V6 competes quite nicely with the TSX. It doesn't handle as well as the TSX, but is accelerates about as well and had better brakes.

 

Ok, ok, you win

 

LOL.

Well, I had hoped to strike a more balanced position. That is, I see your point (the Passat really appeals to a different crowd than the TSX et al) and I see their point as well (the Passat is so good in so many different ways that it can compete with many of the better sport sedans).

 

I've always thought Consumer's Reports had difficulty classifying cars because the definition of "sporty" rather eludes them. I don't get the sense that they have developed a metric that traps "sportyness" on some form of appropriately objective chronometer, and I do think they get a bit hinky in their classifications. Their reviews of cars have gotten better over the years, but they used to exclude "sporty cars" from their assessments because they didn't deem it all that important to review them (ancient history). I also think they run awry with some definitions of "luxury" cars, again - because there is no easily codified definition of luxury.

To that end, I wouldn't place the Passat or the Accord in the same grouping as the TXS, perhaps based - superficially - on the nature of the marketsector that each vehicle seeks to attract, in turn, driven by such subjective things to assess as styling, handling, etc. I've always thought of the Passat as a sensible thoughtful family sedan - with the V6 a rather powerful one - and the Accord as a well-turned out but unexciting family sedan with a great maintenance rep - but hardly carry that sedate, stolid image forth with the TSX.

I would look to CR for absolutely factual interpretation of the statistical database for the items they test; they are objectively tops in that regard most of the time. Great resource for purchasing a washer or a disposall - look at the ratings and buy out of the top three - but I've always taken their view of automobiles with a grain of salt............ Faced with more subjective metrics, I've always felt they veer rather oddly offcourse.

But - getting back to the thread starter, I was startled at the apples/kumquats comparison rendered by choosing different accessory sets - the navi makes a big difference. Glad it was pointed out to them.