neuronbob

Just read the new November CR online. The RL is still recommended but is not even mentioned in the accompanying article. Oh, the pain of being a model late in its existence!



There's a long article on the M35 and why it wins. Curses!

kirbyflorida

No big deal, our car is amazing.

sleepinxlionhart

consumer reports is like in love with the M35, ever since they first reviewed it...so i think there might be biases somewhere...

mrdeeno

And if they gave the RL a top rating instead, it would have been deserved and totally unbiased...right.

Trackruner228

iTrader: (1)

So does caranddriver they rated it higher then the RL as well (although I think in that camparo it was a m45). Anyway the Infinti is a good car. Sure the RL might have advantage A over it, but the infinti is going to have advatage B over the RL. Both are good cars and I dont think you could go wrong with either.

Anyway another thing I noticed is they give the RL just average reliablity which is weird becuase nobody here has really reported any problems and I normally find CR to be very good at those ratings compared to JD.

VOdoc

I saw that issue of CR and had the same reaction as Bob.

At least we're "recommended." But why not the circled check-mark? Five-star safety and SH-AWD; you'd have to be a midwestern grandma to fail an accident-avoidance maneuver in an RL. Oh wait...midwestern grandmas...that's who tests cars for CR! Duh!!

On a brighter note, the RL is featured in a nice ad in a recent Harvard Business Review. Of course, the guys who read that don't buy Infinitis; they buy Benzes and Lexi for status. (Except me!)

GoHawks

I think the glitches that occurred with the '05s kinda dragged it down.

neuronbob

I agree. After all, the TL has been a CR fave for some years now. Is CR biased toward Acura in the "entry luxury" department? The M35 is an awesome car and as many here know (and I shall repeat again), I almost bought one.

I am not particularly upset about the ranking...the RL is still recommended even though it scored a bit lower than the Caddy in their testing.

Any case, I think these are merely the travails of a car that is, in the car world, now long in the tooth. Am I gonna go trade for an M? No way!

lland

My brother has an M35x. It's a great car and I may have bought one if (1) he didn't have one, and (2) there was an Infiniti dealer anywhere near me. There are a few things I like about it that I would have liked to have in the RL (cooled seats (I'm not in Canada), neat lines on the backup camera that shows where the car is going, better 'looking' Nav screen, trademark Infiniti analog clock (I hate where the digital clock is hidden on the RL, lit rocker panels (a nice touch). It deserves the recognition it has received.

LL

elessar

Yeah, what's the deal with that?? Is it really just some minor issues with the 05's that have been fixed now, or is there more to it than that? I thought Nissan/Infiniti were the ones with less-than-stellar reliability these days (ever since the Renault merger). Anybody know how come they got such great "predicted reliability" marks? Did it say anything about that in the article?

hungphan8

I don't know how CR did the tests, but TL score is 90, 91? Certainly, for me, there is no way TL is better than RL overall. I've heard their poll has some flaws (old method, mass reply...)

GoHawks

There were some early issues with AC compressors, XM staellite units acting up. Also some issues with the door handles, but the '06+ models have been pretty solid.

TampaRLX-SH

These ratings are also based on a short, initial impression of the car. It can be difficult to absorb the real feel of a vehicle in a one day trial. Simply comparing features and initial ride quality is a bit subjective. I have my RL nearly as long as I had my TL. The TL did not hold up as well as the RL is in build integrity.

As many of us have discovered, the RL grows on you.

It is similar with 'Initial Quality'. MOST cars have great initial quality. But how will they hold up one / two / three years down the road? I can remember my days with Ford. The cars were nice when new, but self destructed the day the warranty was over. The shelf life was 36 months in my experience.

I generally tune into 'Long Term' ratings. The new car honeymoon these reviews reflect is not something we get to enjoy for a very long period of time. I find more value in ratings that better depict shelf life experiences.

hungphan8

I used to like CR, but now, I take their ratings with a grain of salt. They said the transmission in ES 350 (one of their highest rated) is silky smooth. I've tested 4 lexis (3 es 350, 1 is 250), and ALL had jerky shift, my 05 MDX is WAY better in this. A few years ago, they did not recommend one washing machine because of reliability problem (~20%). I, my brother, my brother-in-law and my friend all have the same machine for about 5, 6 years, and NONE has any problem (yet). Just pure luck?

elessar

Wow, really? With all of the tranny problems the 07 ES & Camry V6 have had? Ok, I guess I can safely go back to ignoring their ratings and stick to my plan of looking for a CPO '06 RL, sometime next year, to replace my TL.

neuronbob

You bring up several good points, Tampa. I'm not even sure the testers get even a full day with the car, and you really need to drive the RL for quite some time (days-weeks) to even partially appreciate it. Unfortunately, That's too long for a reviewer. Fortunately, there are us "fanboys" and sites like AZ to give people a proper perspective on owning this awesome car.

The long term rating is the best indicator of the car's quality, I agree!

Also, CR should be taken with a grain of salt, just like any information source.

AbovePrime.

I'm personally just a bit clueless as to why most of the people that read CR read it like the bible, there is a clear bias in their testing, and they really only print what people want to hear/read, the Japanese auto makers are better than all others.

larrynimmo

i don't know if you all remember back in the mid 70's but
CR compared all cars were compared to their benchmark vehicle...the VW Rabbit. They stayed loyal to VW until there were so many engine failures that they had no choice but move on. What I find funny is the engine issues were well known for about a year before they went from recommended to not recommended.

gdevine

How could they possibly reate the Cady higher than the RL. That completely destroyed CR's credibility. They have made generations of floaty, boat like vehicles that are comfortable for a 110 year old man (I doubled my age). What a disasterous repair record Cads have. OMG

GoHawks

Isn't that "Fanboy" mentality?

GoHawks

To be fair, the NEW CTS looks to be a pretty sweet car. Hide the emblems in the interior and you would swear it could be an interior out of Lexus, Infiniti, and yes Acura.

Good looks, improved fit and finish, a real RWD platform, lots of sport and luxury.

It has seriously got my attention.

That said though, reliability is still a question mark, and it will take some time to see how well the CTS compares to it's Asian counterparts.

neuronbob

+1

In general, The General has come a long way from simply expecting us to simply buy their crap just because they're American. They are producing some excellent product now, with better quality....the CTS has my attention and I plan to test drive it....once the 4G TL is released next year.

Rexorg

You have to consider the source of the ratings. CR subscribers do the ratings thru surveys of cars, washing machines, vacuum cleaners, etc. That is why they think the RL is a luxury car, while in truth it is a mid-lux, as are the others. Also, CR subscribers tend to be upper middle class ($80K+) and higher who tend to complain about every little thing. Ever notice how many "lifetime" subscribers CR gets every month. No way would I give them, or any other consumer organization, thousands of dollars, even though I could.

While CR is usually spot on in their ratings they usually give the highest ratings to the most expensive models. If I am happy with my RL, or my Wally World lawn mower, I could care less what rating CR gives them. I trust the car mag ratings more than CR anyday.

Trackruner228

iTrader: (1)

Another thing to notice is that Acura only lost to BMW and cadillac by a couple points. The ones that really beat were infinti, audi, and merecdes. As long as you guys are happy with your RLs then you should enjoy them who cares what others think as long as your happy.

TampaRLX-SH

That is the wisest comment I have heard from an 18 year old in quite some time. You have restored my faith in America's youth!

GoHawks

Did you guys hear about this?

Normally I would scoff at such a report, but I have experienced some of these quality issues with our Land Cruiser which has legendary reliability. It's built at one of Toyota's most respected plants.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...DATE/710160435

Ford Motor Co. has significantly improved the quality of its cars and trucks, while Toyota Motor Co. slipped out of the No. 1 spot in Consumer Reports newest survey on vehicle reliability.

According to data released today by the well-read consumer advocacy publication, 41 of Ford's 44 models scored average or better in predicted reliability.

Honda Motor Co., meanwhile, edged Toyota out of the top spot. Three Toyota vehicles lost Consumer Report's "buy" recommendation. For the first time in the survey's history, a version of the Toyota Camry - the V6 - isn't recommended by the publication.

Detroit's Big Three need all the positive attention they can get in their battle to stop a flood of customers from turning to foreign-based nameplates. Despite improvements in quality, domestic makers had trouble translating those successes into higher sales.

While Japanese-made vehicles dominate Consumer Report's most-reliable list. Detroit is making headway, said David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports' Auto Test Center.

"Just because a vehicle is made in Japan, doesn't mean it has bullet-proof quality," Champion said.

Champion said General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC continue to have mixed results. Both automakers have managed to get high ratings in launches of key vehicles but then strggled to keep the ratings high.

Consumer Reports said The Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan sedans rank among the most reliable family cars in its survey, along with the Toyota Prius and Honda Accord. Those Ford sedans and the two-wheel drive Ford F-150 V-6 comprise three of the four domestic models on the survey's "most reliable" list.

Despite the downgrade of some of its models, Toyota still ranks third overall in the survey, behind Honda and Subaru.

Auto marques were ranked from one through 36 based on survey results. Overseas automakers snared the first 9 spots; Buick was the top U.S. nameplate at No. 10, followed by No. 11 Mercury, No. 13 Ford and No. 14 Lincoln.

Chrysler was the next domestic maker at No. 20, followed by No. 26 Dodge, No. 28 GMC, No. 29 Jeep, No. 30 Chevrolet and No. 34, Cadillac.

Other findings of the survey:

*Of domestic models rated, 93 percent of Ford, 49 percent of GM and 67 percent of Chrysler models had average or better predicted reliability

*Thirty-four of 39 models on the "most reliable" list are Asian.

*The Pontiac Solstice has the worst new-car prediction score in the survey

*Among 36 makes, Land Rover is least reliable on average.

dwboston

Here's a summary from CNNMoney.com. Interesting how Honda and Acura take the top 2 spots and get no mention beyond that. The whole article is essentially about Toyota and Ford. That was some great methodology by CR: Toyota cars were assumed by them for years to have great initial quality, but now that they have had problems Toyota will have to go through the same rating procedures as everyone else.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/16/auto...ion=2007101613

TampaRLX-SH

This statement should be qualified.

Most Toyotas and Hondas sold in the US are not built in Japan. As many here have discussed, Japan assembly, while not 'bulletproof' is, IMHO, still superior to US assembly. I would put preference of a Japan assembled model over a US assembled model for Toyota, Honda, Acura...any brand.

It is good to hear Ford is responding to the attributes that have put it into the awful state it has been in. But, initial quality is just that...intial. When I read Fords are not disintegrating the day after the warranty expires (from my personal experience), then I will believe that have made progress worth considering.

And concerning Toyota...I do believe they are slipping on quality. In the race to be the biggest car manufacturer, they have also adopted the quality issues of the biggest car manufacturers. Again, from personal experience of a Toyota / Lexus cult family, there ARE issues in current products alarming for a brand known as reliable quality. Toyota Japan execs ripped Toyota USA a new one for the quality issues becoming the word on the street.

And what I find MOST alarming in this article is layers deep. Not only does Honda and Acura take the cake, but the party is still focused Toyota and Ford??? This should be titled: "Honda tops Toyota and Ford makes Headway in the Domestics".

And next I expect Honda will quietly accept this accolade and make NO mention of it in it's marketing and advertising. They might as well whisper in our ears "Hey, did you know we are number one?".


Grrrrrrrrr.........

larrynimmo

With my company I own a fleet of Ford F-350 diesel Trucks. In a one week period this spring, two of these trucks had to go to the shop due to failure of somekind of cooling crossover unit where the cooling system I guess cools the oil. The failure also included the EGR valve and it cost over 5,000 per truck to repair. The 03 had 125,000 miles on it and the 04 had 135,000 miles on it. We sought out help from Ford...not one red cent of goodwill. Non of the injectors were touched with this repair...and they are always failing. Fix Or Replace Daily

lumpulus

More info....

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...portsSays.aspx

TampaRLX-SH

Wow. Those stats are an eye opener.

I am surprised by some of the makes and where they rank relative to others. I would have never thought Jaguar would be above average (even slightly) and Caddy so far below average. There is a whole canyon between them.

Is it me, or does the flavor of CR reviews reflect these rankings (based on consumer feedback)?

lumpulus

It would be interesting to see what weight is placed on consumer surveys vs their own testing....

The only thing they usualy find wrong with Hondas/Acuras is Road Noise, and that could be easily fixed by getting rid of the GARBAGE OEM Michelins.

mrdeeno

I usually see some mention of it in Honda marketing and advertising, but not for Acura.

Considering how well MB's and BMW's sell even with mediocre to poor reliability, it's probably not a big enough factor in the premium segments that it wouldn't make a big difference whether Acura advertised it's reliability or not. It actually seems like the correlation is the more money people spend, the less they need or care about reliability (look at VW's as another example...they cost more than their Honda/Toyota counterparts, yet the lower reliability is accepted).

GoHawks

The correlation may be linked to the fact that most people who are buying premium vehicles lease them as opposed to buying them. As a result, as long as you're turning in the leased car before the warranty expires, you're minimally inconvenienced if there is a problem with the car.

Basically the inconvenience is a trip to the dealer, and if the dealer/manufacturer offers to pick up the car at your home or work and provide you with a comparable loaner, than the pain is even less or gone completely.

Since Acura's lease deals pretty much suck, the people who are acquiring RLs are buying them outright, and may be more interested in longer term reliability since they probably won't turn over the car before 4-5 years in order to minimize the depreciation hit.

SpicyMikey

Maybe. But I suspect no one wants to be stranded on the road or be bringing their car in to the shop 2-3 times a year. Not sure that is "minimally inconvenienced".

I'm still a bit confused when someone buys a Hummer or a Land Rover, etc. I guess they buy them knowing full well that it will probably be in the shop 4 times a year but are willing to accept that negative for other positive factors (image, comfortable with the dealership). What else could it be besides those two big ones?

VChron

The problem is that your numbers are way off base. The average car on the CR survey has only 2 "serious" problems in about 4 years. So, the rankings amount to this, rounding to whole numbers of problems:

We are way past the early 1990s when the average was about 4 "serious" problems, but don't expect CR to point that out anytime soon. They have magazines to sell.

AsianTL

I am glad I bought my Acura RL and had made the right decision.

After 11 months and 8,500 miles on it and no single problem so far (Just oil change)


C/P:
Findings are based on responses on almost 1.3 million vehicles owned or leased by subscribers to Consumer Reports or its Web site. The survey covered model years 1998 to 2007.

How makes compare Rank Make % above avg. Rank Make % above avg.
1
Honda 48
19
Volvo 2

2
Acura 44
20
Chrysler 1

3
Scion 43
21
Nissan 1

4
Subaru 38
22
Audi -9

5
Toyota 38
23
Kia -9

6
Lexus 34
24
Saturn -13

7
Infiniti 31
25
Saab -14

8
Mitsubishi 31
26
Dodge -21

9
Porsche 30
27
Suzuki -22

10
Buick 20
28
GMC -24

11
Mercury 18
29
Jeep -26

12
Mini 17
30
Chevrolet -32

13
Ford 16
31
Volkswagen -40

14
Lincoln 14
32
Pontiac -42

15
Hyundai 12
33
Mercedes-Benz -57

16
Jaguar 10
34
Cadillac -68

17
Mazda 8
35
Hummer -86

18
BMW 3
36
Land Rover -153

GoHawks

That's the point I was trying to make. Reliability among even the domestics has improved to the point that very few of them will ever have such a serious problem that will leave you stranded, at least during the warranty period. Most will be little electronic glitches (like the Nav failing in my Land Cruiser) or other non-incapacitating issues.

My opinion is that what differentiates the Asians from the domestics is fit & finish, along with LONG TERM reliability.

Fit and finish is less of an issue with the Germans, but long term reliability is, and that's not going to be an issue if you're leasing it and turning it over every 2-3 years.

VChron

Agreed. There are very few models that are unreliable in an absolute practical sense. Today's below-average to average cars are as reliable as the reliability leaders of the early 1990s.


We obviously have no actual long term reliability data for new cars. The best data for predicting their long term reliability is data from the early years. It's pointless to try and use data from, say, 10 year-old cars because you would be looking at what WAS, rather than what IS. That data is only really useful if you're looking to buy a 10-year-old used car.

New cars will not look the same when they get to that age, because of the dramatic improvement in reliability that occurred over those 10 years. All brands improved, but they did so by different amounts. Generally speaking, domestic and European brands outpaced the Japanese brands. Furthermore, models have since been completely redesigned or discontinued.

TL_Captain

Jaguar S-type costs $54K, poor reliability, ancient design (10+ years ?) and got the same score as the RL??? Not sure what/how the rating is based on.