Consumer Reports: Annual Results News
 

why is volkswagon a category? or is that a typo?

LOL!!

its part of the family sedan category:

hmm why not the 540i as best car. may be too pricy

Wow, that is funny. lol

Yeah, considering the 530i is on there, they probably thought the 540i isn't THAT much of an improvement for the price.

the 530 is supposed to be a pretty neat sedan even with the seeming lack of power.

At all costs, let's keep Floozy from seeing this.....Consumer Reports on TSX & TL
 

Just got the October issue of Consumer Reports. I tried to find the stuff online so I could give a link, but seems like it's not online yet. So, in my usual "public-service capacity," :D I guess I'll just type out the whole thing.

These aren't the regular reviews that CR is famous for. This issue gives just short summaries of all the new and redesigned models.

It's not that the write-ups of the TSX and the new TL are BAD. But, we'd like to have seen better. CR is kind of lukewarm about both cars.

BUT -- It looks to me like they haven't considered the TSX very closely yet, and, pretty obviously, that they haven't driven the TL at all. Here are the write-ups:


ACURA TSX

The company line: The 2004 TSX is being touted as an all-new sports sedan from Honda's luxury division. It comes with a strong 200-hp, four-cylinder engine, large 17-inch wheels, and a "race-bred" suspension. It's priced at $26,490.

CR's take: The TSX is really a reworked and rebadged version of the smaller Honda Accord sold in Europe and Japan. It's agile, and is likely to be reliable. But a smarter buy might be the U.S. Accord. It's an excellent sedan that handles well and, when equipped with a V6, has more power and more room and costs less.

ACURA TL

The company line: Acura is calling the redesigned TL a sports sedan that's intended to compete with the BMW 3- and 5- series, the Audi A6, and the Infiniti G35. It's more performance-oriented than even the previous TL's sporty "S" version. Priced in the mid-$30,000's, the V6 TL has one option, a navigation system.

CR's take: Because this new TL is based on the redesigned Honda Accord, it will likely be more well-rounded and fun to drive than its pleasant but unexciting predecessor. The TL has more standard equipment and a more dynamic look, but the V6-powered Accord provides similar performance for about $5000 less.


Consumer Reports historically has been notorious for not "getting it" about the advantages of "luxury" brands over their cousin brands. For example, they give Lexuses somewhat of a hard time about not being "that much" better than Toyotas, etc. So, this isn't a huge surprise. But still, at least about the TSX and probably the TL too, I gotta believe they'll be a lot more positive after giving them fuller consideration.

So, I wonder how long CR spent behind the wheel of a new TL? Ten minutes? Maybe twenty? Heck...I don't know what it drives like, but all the reviews seem to say some pretty good things about this new TL--Automobile loves the car. :dunno:

I'd much rather have an Acura over any Honda--even a used Acura before a new Honda. Who cares what floozy thinks...let him read it and tell us all "told ya so" :rolleyes: Who's he trying to sway around here? Is he trying to justify his purchase?


SPUDMTN :toocool:

I think it's pretty clear they didn't drive it at all.

Wouldn't surprise me...sad thing is that a lot of people rely on CR a WHOLE lot. How can they make a statement like that w/o driving the thing? With their logic, they might as well tell everyone to go get a Kia because they're a much better value...:rolleyes:

I don't have any problem with any of this. The Accord probably is a better buy than the TSX. If you want bang for the buck in a practical vehicle that performs well, you simply can't beat the Accord. It is a world class sedan, loaded to the gill with features, for only 25,000 or so.

But, getting the most possible for my money was not what this purchase was about. I wanted a car that was fun, sleek looking, sporty, and somewhat unique. This was not true of the Accord. Yeah, in some ways the TSX is not as "smart" a buy as the Accord. So what? I look forward to getting into the TSX every morning. I did not feel like that about my last Accord.

I'm actually glad that Consumer Reports is luke warm on the 04TL! Except for quality, their weighting of features is different than mine. I have no doubt that an Accord would be a "better buy", and it is a good car, but it is not what I want.

-r

Only if US Accord look half decent like it's predecessor then I would consider it.

99.9999999% sure Consumer Reports has not driven the new TL; they purportedly buy all their cars on the open market, ergo....

Bottom line is how can you trust a magazine that ALSO reviews toaster ovens??? They simply don't have the credentials. I dismiss anything car-related that CR puts out.

But there is an upside: the less hoopla surrounding this car, the better the changes of getting at least $500 off sticker....In my dreams.

lol

But, a couple of things:

I think CR's opinions in general are very, very useful, as long as you understand their biases and take them into account. They are strongly biased toward economy, and tend not to recognize the possible worth of just a bit of additional this or that. They constantly say stuff like, why pay a few thousand more for a Lexus when a Camry is almost as good. Acura isn't alone in suffering from this bias. (BTW -- Need I mention that a lot of people on our boards feel just about the same way?)

CR has a lot of good points. The first and main one, IMO, is that whatever biases they have aren't based on outside influence. In that sense, they are completely "unbiased." Their "biases" are just their own personal preferences. And, even though they also do toaster ovens, their car people clearly know cars, they write extremely well, and their stuff is done in a format that makes it very easy to compare one car to another.

Finally, probably the main reason I value CR so highly is, their definition of "Reliability" is just about exactly the same as my own concept of it, and although some of their "Reliability" stuff is presented in a confusing way, for the most part it's done clearly and very well. I haven't found a single other place that does reliability ratings where the definition of it is anywhere near as meaningful to me. IMO, JD Power totally sucks in this regard.


BTW: I don't think there's ANY question about whether they've driven the TL: THEY HAVEN'T. If you look closely at their wording, they basically admit it.

They sure love the Accord!

I 100% agree with EVERYTHING Larchmont said.

As far as the reliability stuff is concerned, I've found that the only people who don't trust CR are those who drive poorly rated vehicles (i.e., Audi) and can't handle the idea that they didn't make a good choice.

CR's criticism of the TL and TSX was predicatable. Both cars are lower in "value" (i.e., bang for the buck) than the Accord. CR is not going to recommend cars based on style and fun. Its just not that way they work.

Yeah I read that in my issue yesterday. CR is not the place to turn to for car info.

Darth62,

Since you said in another thread that you own an A4....
1) Why did you buy it?
2) What problems have you had with it?

Where the heck is my magazine? I should get it tomorrow I guess.. :D

Anyways. I really don't have a problem what Consumer Reports is saying either. Is what they're saying true? Yes. It is. We already knew this, but people like the TSX better. Wanting an Accord would probably be better on the budget and also perhaps more power, but it's butt ugly.

Consumer Reports are pretty good for what they do. And they do not take the press cars that CD get and others. They go out and buy every single product they test and accept no ads. They've been testing since 1936.

BTW. I looked on the website. It's not up yet. But I saw Ford is recalling some SUV's.

I said my family owns one. That was a reference to my sister, who bought a A4 1.8T about a year ago. The car is still new and she hasn't had many problems (some annoying electrical issuesm but nothing serious).

Why did she buy it? It is a great looking car with a world class interior that handles and performs extremely well. She didn't care much about reliablity when we she purchased it. I'm in that car once or twice a week, and I understand what she sees in it.

We (my family) also have a BMW and a M-B. I was the only one who opted to go with a Honda product. I have a low tolerance for reliability problems, and always have.

As do I.

But I have had no serious problems in 3yrs/10mos/47k-mi of ownership... nothing to test my tolerance.

At the time I bought it, CR still "recommended it" with "at least average reliability".

Even in the 2003 Auto Issue, CR still has 1999 A4's with "average reliability".

So maybe my trouble-free experience is not so unusual for 1999's, but maybe I should heed CR's warnings about the 2003's, etc.... That's why I am interested in the TSX and RSX along with the A4 and upcoming A3.

I'm kinda of glad they didnt give the TSX positive reviews like all the other publications out there...for ppl reading CR dont buy it! I'm already seeing TSXs popping up everywhere, a neighbor just got a black/parch/at/navi! so much for being the only one on the block with a TSX :D

I don't find the article negative. CR is about saving money and being practical and when you can get its American cousin for less that's a smart choice if you don't think about the aesthetics. Anbd money is your only consideration. I looked at the Accord among 5 or 6 others and for me, the TSX was a choice over the Accord as well as the others.

CR has been my guide for years on everything from toasters to cars and I have found it to be reliable and far less biased than auto magazines and web sites devoted to a particular model or brand. CR is way less emotional. But CR can't evaluate every little issue to be considered. They lay it out there and let the reader decide which is as it should be.

The issue is not what will happen in three years or four years. I think most cars these days can be expected to be reasonably reliable for the first couple of years. The real question is how will the car act when you got 80,000 miles on it and have owned if for five or six years? I've been following the reliability of VW and Audi for years (because, frankly, they are some of my favorite cars on the road). According to CR, they seem to hold up well at first (hence, the average to above average ratings for a few years in the late nineties) but then develop serious problems after five or six years of ownership. Of course, if you don't keep a car long, that is not an issue.

IMO, the VW Passat will out perform virtually anything (include the TSX and TL) for under 35,000. But, I just don't trust the reliability.

If by "out perform", you mean be slower than the projected 0-60 for the TL (and TSX?) and not handle as well as the TSX (and maybe not the TL), then I think you're on to something.

And here's a line from Road and Track to mull over: "It's a strange world we live in; the Accord feels like a German car, and the Passat doesn't." :-)

EDIT: This is not to say I think the passat is a bad car - I like it, but I wouldn't buy one. I look forward to the next model, when it has some updates (and hopefully at least maintains its decent reliability) and therefore is worth the price.

Yeah, Road and Track was the only publication that didn't like the Passat.

The 2.8 six in the Passat (and even the 3.0 in the Audi) is a dated design and it lacks low end torque. It probably won't be as quick as the 4 in the TSX.

But, the Passat will handle nearly as well, have a MUCH nicer ride, being quieter, and brake a lot better. It is a better overall vehicle. It just won't have the TSX's style or reliability.

Personally, I think the Passat is a little expensive, but I think it is a great looking car and has nice features.

Trust me, the Passat does not ride/handle all that well. I own an '02 1.8T GLS Tip. It's ride is underdamped and can be harsh at times. It is for the most part quiet, but rattles are a widespead problem. The weird thing is at first the Passat feels pretty sporty (for a sedan), but once you start to push the car the suspension gets all wallowy and there is way to much body lean in the corners. There is also pronounced nose dive when braking which I dislike. If there is one area where the Passat shines it's on the highway where the car is quiet and composed IMHO.

For what it's worth, I test drove a TSX twice and found it's ride and handling to be superior to that of the Passat. In fact I almost bought one, and would have if not for the fact that I really want my next car to have 240+ horsepower.

Thanks for the input, Jwaters. My experience with the Passat is limited to test drives and an occassional ride in my ex-GF"S vehicle. It does help to hear from somebody who owns one and drives it everyday.

I dunno, dang near every Lexus has been Recommended. Remember, they would rather us ALL drive Camry's and Accords.

Part of Honda's problem with Acura is the Accord is so damn good, many people don't see any reason to pay more for Acura.

I'm sure both the TL and TSX will be "recommended." But, as with the LEXUS, it will be recommended with the caveat that there are better buys available. For example, the RX330 and ES300 are both on CR's recommeded list. But, with both vehicles, CR advises readers that the corresponding Toyota vehicle is a better buy.

CR is a magazine for car BUYERS, not drivers.

They don't care about (or know about?) aesthetics or intangibles. They are the left-brain approach to cars. A bit soulless but still helpful.

I don't think they drove any of the cars in that article. It was just an overview of the redesigns expected for '04.

CU's whole charter is to figure our the best value, to separate what you want from what you need. Their priorities are 1) safety 2) reliablity 3) cost 4) comfort 5) performance.

Given that acura is the luxury lineup from Honda, almost by definition, the accord is going to be a better value. If you take the deals being cut on accords into account versus paying the full MSRP that you're likely to be doing with the TL for a few months, the difference in price is probably going to be 8-10k.

They pretty much said the TSX and the TL could be expected to be more fun, and more luxurious. But that the accord has all one really needs. Nothing wrong with that.

CU does do upscale reviews. Based on price, I'd expect to see the TL compared to the ES300, the 3series, etc - or as the value alternative to GS, 5series. But there they tend to look at the absolute best there where price isn't as much of a consideration.

Terrific summary, IMO. Right on.

I'd put that last part a little differently, though. I think they DO take price into account a bit even in the "upscale" summaries, and I think TSX will get extra brownie points for that ..... (TL? Dunno, depends on exactly what the price will be.) .....and I think this factor might very well toss the TSX to the top of the heap in CR when all is said and done.

Have a 2000 A6 Avant Quattro: the reliability is terrible.

Also have a subscription to both magazine and online copy of Consumer Reports. Love reading their car reviews, as well as other gear for the house.

I respectfully disagree. We have a 2003 Passat v6 GLX (her car), and the ride is superior to that of the TSX. It doesn't handle as well, and it's no quicker, but the ride is smoother and more comfortable. At 16k, we've had no rattles or reliability issues and I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

About CR, I think other people have already got it right. They have a slant towards practicality and they are useful for that. It a way, CR balances the views of the car mags and Edmunds that are biased towards performance without really considering reliability in any meaningfull way.

The way I see it is, if you follow just the car mags, you might end up with a great performing car that will fall apart around you and won't hold your golf clubs. If you follow just CR, you'll end up with your parents' car.

Great post -- I think that really says it.

That's not at all fair. I'm a big fan of CR but own a VW Jetta. In fact, it's my second one. First one was crap, traded it 18 months later for a 1.8T, second one is fine except for some rattles.

Being how I owned a trouble-free Integra for 11 years and 200K miles, I've tried very hard to get back into the Acura fold. If the TSX had been around in 2000 when I first bought a Jetta, there would have been no question. I would have bought a TSX.

Now that I've strayed into the German car camp, I can't seem to come back. It doesn't matter what I test drive (G35, IS300, TSX, and CL-S), I like my own car better, even if it won't be as reliable as the Acura. The 325i would suit me but I'm a tightwad and won't spend that much (and my car has a much nicer clutch :D).

Sigh. I keep trying, though. After all, I'm still hanging out around here for some weird reason. Maybe it will rub off or something...
:dunno:

rb1, have you heard that the new Golf (due out in 05 in NA) is 80% stiffer than its predesessor? It makes me wonder if the old one was made of swiss cheese?

I'm guessing the same would hold true for the new Jetta as well then? If thats the case I would'nt expect to see you in a Honda/Acura anytime soon. If there reliable thsoe new Golf's look like a pretty sweet little car. And they have a 150HP I5 base engine.