Why does Consumer Reports down the RL
#1
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: central valley CA
Age: 71
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why does Consumer Reports down the RL
I've noticed that CR really downs the 2ndG RL. They give it an OK rating of 74 or 75 but really seem to down on predicted reliability AVG. They show the Audio system to be a black circle. What?
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
#2
I'm sure the audio system got the black circle because BMW left a bad taste in everyones mouth with their IDrive system. Now whenever CR or anyone not familiar with Acura's knob based system commander, they automatically deem it bad.
I personally love Acura's knob. After the first few days of ownership, I was able to wiz my way through commands and menus with ease.
I personally love Acura's knob. After the first few days of ownership, I was able to wiz my way through commands and menus with ease.
#3
Originally Posted by gdevine
I've noticed that CR really downs the 2ndG RL. They give it an OK rating of 74 or 75 but really seem to down on predicted reliability AVG. They show the Audio system to be a black circle. What?
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
And they want me to pay for their mag? Sorry, nope. <wide grin>
Tom
yes, I know YMMV!
<wink>
#4
Three Wheelin'
CR are the type of pansies who would complain about a Ferrari being too loud, or about a Lambo not having adequate ground clearance over speed bumps.
However, although I've usually half-respected their reliability reports, I'm surprised that they gave the 2G RL a predicted "low" reliability rating. The 1G was probably one of the, if not the MOST reliable vehicle you could buy on the market, so what's to say that the 2G won't live up to that rep. I haven't heard of any major flaws with the 2GRL - just the usual 1st year problems that occasionally pop up - a rattle, an electronic gremlin and such.
Have you ever looked at CR's 0-60 times for vehicles - they're nothing but laughable. I can almost guarantee that a two year old could coax better times out of some of the cars they test that they can. CR should stick to dishwashers and refrigerators and leave the roadtests to the real mags.
However, although I've usually half-respected their reliability reports, I'm surprised that they gave the 2G RL a predicted "low" reliability rating. The 1G was probably one of the, if not the MOST reliable vehicle you could buy on the market, so what's to say that the 2G won't live up to that rep. I haven't heard of any major flaws with the 2GRL - just the usual 1st year problems that occasionally pop up - a rattle, an electronic gremlin and such.
Have you ever looked at CR's 0-60 times for vehicles - they're nothing but laughable. I can almost guarantee that a two year old could coax better times out of some of the cars they test that they can. CR should stick to dishwashers and refrigerators and leave the roadtests to the real mags.
#7
Senior Moderator
Eh? I just looked at the overview of the RL. The 2005 does have a few black marks, but overall they RECOMMEND the car. They say:
Highs: Acceleration, real-time link to traffic reports in metro areas, fit and finish.
Lows: Complex controls, turning circle.
Which I agree with totally.
EDIT: Wow, they do kind of down the handling (which is better with A-Spec anyway
) and the interior, which in the rear is not much larger than the TL. Still like the RL anyway!
![](http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/7277/rlconsreportspb2.jpg)
Highs: Acceleration, real-time link to traffic reports in metro areas, fit and finish.
Lows: Complex controls, turning circle.
Which I agree with totally.
EDIT: Wow, they do kind of down the handling (which is better with A-Spec anyway
![Smile](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
![](http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/7277/rlconsreportspb2.jpg)
![](http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/2395/rlconsreports2ld6.jpg)
Trending Topics
#8
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Touge
What 0-60 did CR get for the RL ? Anyone have a scan to the article ?
#11
They should rename Consumer Reports to
Consumer Toyota Reports
Toyota could sell a lawnmower with a bad sparkplug and they would STILL give it rave ratings. CR hates anything that is new, interesting or stylish. THey love boring and reliable. Real car people ignore CR.
Consumer Toyota Reports
Toyota could sell a lawnmower with a bad sparkplug and they would STILL give it rave ratings. CR hates anything that is new, interesting or stylish. THey love boring and reliable. Real car people ignore CR.
#12
Senior Moderator
I happen to be a member of Consumer Reports' web service. I think they do a decent job, but I don't depend on them for anything but used car reliability information, which is often dead on.
I expect their rating of the 2006 RL to be better as new owners such as myself should have (hopefully
) fewer problems.
I expect their rating of the 2006 RL to be better as new owners such as myself should have (hopefully
![Wish](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/wish.gif)
#13
Originally Posted by gdevine
I've noticed that CR really downs the 2ndG RL. They give it an OK rating of 74 or 75 but really seem to down on predicted reliability AVG. They show the Audio system to be a black circle. What?
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
#14
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: central valley CA
Age: 71
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bkw
I'm sure the audio system got the black circle because BMW left a bad taste in everyones mouth with their IDrive system. Now whenever CR or anyone not familiar with Acura's knob based system commander, they automatically deem it bad.
I personally love Acura's knob. After the first few days of ownership, I was able to wiz my way through commands and menus with ease.
I personally love Acura's knob. After the first few days of ownership, I was able to wiz my way through commands and menus with ease.
#15
Black
So CR does like the TL (good predicted reliability) and doesn't like the RL.
The irony here is that my 2004 TL (VIN #002690) was complete crap. Tires, sunroof, transmission, large gap in interior pieces, paint (chipping and uneven color), pre-mature leather patina/cracking, and dashboard fading.
My 2005 RL? Nothing. I can't even remember the last time I visited my dealer (for an oil change).
The irony here is that my 2004 TL (VIN #002690) was complete crap. Tires, sunroof, transmission, large gap in interior pieces, paint (chipping and uneven color), pre-mature leather patina/cracking, and dashboard fading.
My 2005 RL? Nothing. I can't even remember the last time I visited my dealer (for an oil change).
#16
What a lot of people don't know is that Consumer Reports (aka Consumers Union) gets many of their ratings from their own readers. When I used to subscribe to CR, they would often send me surveys to complete so I could evaluate various products, including the cars I drive. They then compile these responses to augment their ratings. Other scores come from their own labs, and evaluators.
#17
black mark
The black mark does not mean they don't like a particular category, but their surveys indicate that category may be more problematic. On the 03 TL, for example, it has a solid black mark in transmission--well known area of concern, as well as audio---balky cd changer? So CU may like a car, but in the frequency repair record--the car may get panned as it didn't do well in questionaire/survey that their members respond to. As a regular subscriber to CU, I have made car purchases where I thought they were being over critical. and everytime I have regretted it. My 1998 Catera--did well in the road tests, but poorly in the survey. Though I really liked the car--it was by far, the worst I have ever owned.
#18
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by nmariani
What a lot of people don't know is that Consumer Reports (aka Consumers Union) gets many of their ratings from their own readers. When I used to subscribe to CR, they would often send me surveys to complete so I could evaluate various products, including the cars I drive. They then compile these responses to augment their ratings. Other scores come from their own labs, and evaluators.
#19
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: central valley CA
Age: 71
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jhr3uva90
Maybe that's a problem with Consumer Reports: their sample size is too narrow. How many people really subscribe to that magazine and how diverse are they? What are their demographics?
#20
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: central valley CA
Age: 71
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by neuronbob
I happen to be a member of Consumer Reports' web service. I think they do a decent job, but I don't depend on them for anything but used car reliability information, which is often dead on.
I expect their rating of the 2006 RL to be better as new owners such as myself should have (hopefully
) fewer problems.
I expect their rating of the 2006 RL to be better as new owners such as myself should have (hopefully
![Wish](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/wish.gif)
Since you've been a member of Consumer Reports have you ever received a survey for your TL or RL? Just wondering if they send surveys to all of their members?
#22
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mississippi
Age: 78
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gdevine
I've noticed that CR really downs the 2ndG RL. They give it an OK rating of 74 or 75 but really seem to down on predicted reliability AVG. They show the Audio system to be a black circle. What?
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
They talk about the lack of power, and OK handling. Overall a depressing, negative report.
They give the TL a rating of 90 and predicted reliability of excellent.
Why do they give the RL such a low reliability rating.
Any thoughts.
As for the RL, and from my experience with my '05RL over the past year and a half, with now approaching 52,000 miles, I can't disagree or fault their assessments and impressions for the car except that I don't find the control knob to be that intimidating or inconvenient. They also found some of the the control functions to be redundant, but I've tended to use and appreciate the overall setup.
As for the overall ratings, I didn't send in my survey for the RL, but if I had, it would have reflected the problems I've had and posted about here...and would have blasted the incredibly bad service experience I've had with my RL, both with regular servicing and with obtaining warranty repairs.
Fred
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post