Still Annoyed with Consumer Reports
03-02-2007, 01:30 PM
#1
Not an Ashtray
Thread Starter
Still Annoyed with Consumer Reports
Here is my pet peeve with CR: They report the price range for every "upscale" car in the latest issue(their annual auto test issue), including the low end of the model range and the high end of the range. For example, for the BMW 3-series, they report a range of prices from the 325 and 330. Likewise, for the Audi A4, they report the range for the A4 2.0 to A4 3.2. However, the only price they report for the TSX is the most expensive model (with NAV). What irks me about this is that the price on the TSX is then compared with cars at the low end of other model ranges. In earlier issues, CR concluded that the USDM Accord is less expensive than the TSX, and they compared the price of an Accord WITHOUT NAV to the TSX WITH NAV.
Your response might be "Why don't you just write CR and tell them they've made a mistake, and remind them that they need to compare apples to apples and oranges to orange?" The answer is that I've written them every year since they started reviewing the TSX, I even chatted with the auto editors at their website and was told the problem will be corrected. Yet, year after year after year, they keep making the exact same mistake.
Your response might be "Why don't you just write CR and tell them they've made a mistake, and remind them that they need to compare apples to apples and oranges to orange?" The answer is that I've written them every year since they started reviewing the TSX, I even chatted with the auto editors at their website and was told the problem will be corrected. Yet, year after year after year, they keep making the exact same mistake.
03-02-2007, 01:42 PM
#3
Have camera, will travel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CR has its virtues, but it does not evaluate cars the way any self-respecting enthusiast would. Reliability ratings are their strength, imo.
03-02-2007, 01:54 PM
#5
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 43
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i don't remember it's CR or Car & Driver....i think they are LOVE in BMW CEO.... everytime i read article about G35, IS350, TL-S, or all other sport sedans, they ALWAYS say...."now being closer to 3 series" or "a few more step from 3 series"..... i know BMW is pretty good cars....but not EXCLUSIVELY good.....
Trending Topics
03-02-2007, 03:57 PM
#13
Needs more Lemon Pledge
IMO CR has lost a lot of its credibility in a variety of categories. The car seat fiasco, their review of high end LCD televisions, now cars. I feel like they are experiencing a much greater amount of pressure from (or caving to it) from manufacturers.
03-02-2007, 06:57 PM
#15
Senior Moderator
didn't hear that one.. but i did disagree with several of their reviews & top picks (and omissions) of RP & LCD TVs... like a lot of people on AVSforum.
...the world is coming to an end!
03-03-2007, 09:23 AM
#18
Where did my garage go?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Age: 55
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just my two cents....
as it pertains to Acura products, i think CR puts too much emphasis on 'value' -- which is why Honda Civics, Accords, and Odysseys get the ol' CR seal of approval every year while Acura products don't. Despite the fact that Acuras are made of mostly the same parts with the same, if not better, quality. It doesn't matter to CR. They can't figure out the 'value' angle of a $30,000 Honda.
I was considering a Mazda6 a few years ago, but CR trashed it saying it did not retain value and that the 6 suffered from poor quality -- which they were right about; even the Mazda6 owners admit this on their community site when they talk about the dismal resale value. CR, however, loves the Mazda3. Because it's a good value. Go figure.
summary:
sometimes CR is right on the money, but they put too much emphasis on vehicle cost.
The thing is; do you want to take car advice from the same people who evaluate toasters?
/snark
as it pertains to Acura products, i think CR puts too much emphasis on 'value' -- which is why Honda Civics, Accords, and Odysseys get the ol' CR seal of approval every year while Acura products don't. Despite the fact that Acuras are made of mostly the same parts with the same, if not better, quality. It doesn't matter to CR. They can't figure out the 'value' angle of a $30,000 Honda.
I was considering a Mazda6 a few years ago, but CR trashed it saying it did not retain value and that the 6 suffered from poor quality -- which they were right about; even the Mazda6 owners admit this on their community site when they talk about the dismal resale value. CR, however, loves the Mazda3. Because it's a good value. Go figure.
summary:
sometimes CR is right on the money, but they put too much emphasis on vehicle cost.
The thing is; do you want to take car advice from the same people who evaluate toasters?
/snark
03-03-2007, 11:33 AM
#19
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Georgia
Age: 59
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CR is good for tracking the reliability reports. They are good on some testing, as long as you use it as a guideline, and don't, like, refuse to read anything else on the subject.
I remember years ago car guys complaining about CR rating cars and that they should stick to appliances... when someone said that they were in the appliance field, and felt that CR was not good for advice there! Heh! (Perhaps he thought they were unfair to certain brands, or were biased in certain ways, I don't recall.) The point being that they are good for general advice, but try not to put total faith in it.
I remember years ago car guys complaining about CR rating cars and that they should stick to appliances... when someone said that they were in the appliance field, and felt that CR was not good for advice there! Heh! (Perhaps he thought they were unfair to certain brands, or were biased in certain ways, I don't recall.) The point being that they are good for general advice, but try not to put total faith in it.
03-03-2007, 02:10 PM
#20
Not an Ashtray
Thread Starter
I am not nearly as down on CR as some of you. I just would like them to simply correct an error they make year after year after year. I don't think it is too much to ask the so called consumer "bible" to simply report prices correctly.
03-03-2007, 11:21 PM
#21
Instructor
Join Date: Oct 2005
Age: 56
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you looked closely at how they collect and report their reliability results, you wouldn't think so highly of their reliability info.
I've written a series of critiques of their methods. People have copied and pasted some of these into CR's own forum--I learned this when my site started getting clickthroughs from there.
Neither CR nor anyone else has ever directly challenged the points made in these critiques, much less successfully refuted them. The response I sometimes get is that "the cars I've owned have fit their ratings." And your sample size is how large? My own samples are small, a couple dozen. But the same people who discount my research because of the sample sizes feel that conclusions based on the handful of cars they've owned are valid.
They've been the only game in town for a long time, so it's understandable that people assume they must do the best possible job with this research. But they don't come close.
I don't think they're biased, or that they're getting paid off. I think they've just gotten slow and sloppy, like just about any organization does when it has no real competition.
If their practices are distorted by anything, it's by the desire to sell more magazines. Hence the increasing number of ads for it.
I've written a series of critiques of their methods. People have copied and pasted some of these into CR's own forum--I learned this when my site started getting clickthroughs from there.
Neither CR nor anyone else has ever directly challenged the points made in these critiques, much less successfully refuted them. The response I sometimes get is that "the cars I've owned have fit their ratings." And your sample size is how large? My own samples are small, a couple dozen. But the same people who discount my research because of the sample sizes feel that conclusions based on the handful of cars they've owned are valid.
They've been the only game in town for a long time, so it's understandable that people assume they must do the best possible job with this research. But they don't come close.
I don't think they're biased, or that they're getting paid off. I think they've just gotten slow and sloppy, like just about any organization does when it has no real competition.
If their practices are distorted by anything, it's by the desire to sell more magazines. Hence the increasing number of ads for it.
03-04-2007, 08:13 AM
#22
Advanced
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wixom, MI
Age: 45
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sidssp
So what? Acura is still selling out all the TSX they can make. When I bought mine last summer, I had to wait for a whole month to get any color other than black.
Last summer (June/July) I had to wait a couple of weeks to get a black one.
Hmm......
03-04-2007, 03:24 PM
#23
Originally Posted by mkaresh
If you looked closely at how they collect and report their reliability results, you wouldn't think so highly of their reliability info.
I've written a series of critiques of their methods. People have copied and pasted some of these into CR's own forum--I learned this when my site started getting clickthroughs from there.
Neither CR nor anyone else has ever directly challenged the points made in these critiques, much less successfully refuted them. The response I sometimes get is that "the cars I've owned have fit their ratings." And your sample size is how large? My own samples are small, a couple dozen. But the same people who discount my research because of the sample sizes feel that conclusions based on the handful of cars they've owned are valid.
They've been the only game in town for a long time, so it's understandable that people assume they must do the best possible job with this research. But they don't come close.
I don't think they're biased, or that they're getting paid off. I think they've just gotten slow and sloppy, like just about any organization does when it has no real competition.
If their practices are distorted by anything, it's by the desire to sell more magazines. Hence the increasing number of ads for it.
I've written a series of critiques of their methods. People have copied and pasted some of these into CR's own forum--I learned this when my site started getting clickthroughs from there.
Neither CR nor anyone else has ever directly challenged the points made in these critiques, much less successfully refuted them. The response I sometimes get is that "the cars I've owned have fit their ratings." And your sample size is how large? My own samples are small, a couple dozen. But the same people who discount my research because of the sample sizes feel that conclusions based on the handful of cars they've owned are valid.
They've been the only game in town for a long time, so it's understandable that people assume they must do the best possible job with this research. But they don't come close.
I don't think they're biased, or that they're getting paid off. I think they've just gotten slow and sloppy, like just about any organization does when it has no real competition.
If their practices are distorted by anything, it's by the desire to sell more magazines. Hence the increasing number of ads for it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
emailnatec
5G TLX Tires, Wheels & Suspension
29
09-28-2018 04:27 PM