Consumer Reports on Vehicle Manufacturs.

[Diamondpilot]

I can remember filling out one of their surveys years ago. I can't remember what problem I had with the vehicle, but it was something easy and cheap to fix, like a thermostat. Sure enough, I noticed a year or two later, that car had poor marks for the cooling system, even thought it cost me like 10 bucks to fix. You have to filter the data a little bit. I can in all honsetly say I've only had one vehicle I hated and had a lot of problems with, a 77 Ford Granada, which was my first vehcile and given to me by my dad. The rest I have lived with the problems and fixed what needed fixed.

I would have hated it just because it was a Granada! :laughing::laughing::laughing:

My uncle had a brown one with 6x9 speaker tilted up in the rear window and a Radio Shack equalizer mounted below the dash. I hated that car.

Chris

 

[Lt CHEG]

In all honesty with the exception of my first truck, a 1983 GMC Sierra with 6.2 L Diesel (BLEH) I don't think I've ever owned a bad vehicle. Of course I like new car smell too much and usually replace my vehicles fairly often. I know for a fact I haven't owned a vehicle more than 10 years old since then and I don't see myself doing so anytime soon either. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think for the most part if you don't treat your vehicle like garbage and also properly service and maintain it, you will have a good vehicle ownership experience.

 

[Builder]

Consumer reports is a magazine written by bearded marxists for people who are too helpless to figure anything out for themselves.

If I followed their advice, I'd be trying to pull my backhoe with a Prius. :laughing:

When I want to know who builds a great truck, I ask people who use them for a living for their intended purpose, not let some cute young lady who drove it through a mud puddle and put lipstick on in the vanity mirror then decided who built the best truck.

 

[mojoinco]

Over the years I have noticed a number of details in the annual CR issue with vehicle survey stats. It doesn't give much detail on sample sizes, it doesn't weight importance of particular problem areas (I don't think many of us would have the same concern over a persistent issue with say an audio system problem versus a transmission issue -- though we may not be happy about it).

Then we add in things like the mentioned perception that a brand should get a free ride over others (though it may often be something to consider in view of past performance -- which I have seen them print in the reviews).

Then you add in the Suzuki Samurai and Izusu/Acura debacle. The result of the Samurai case (short version: Top court lets Suzuki sue Consumer Reports / Automaker accuses magazine of rigging Samurai road test - SFGate)
ended in Suzuki and CR coming to an agreement that CR wouldn't use the Samurai results in any advertising (they could use it in editorials though). CR was alleged to have tested the Samurai and found no significant faults, but the president/manager needed a sensational case to help raise funds and asked the head of auto testing to toughen up the testing until it failed. Of course, if you are testing a truck that is primarily the 4 wheel version of a dirt bike to a sedan, that will not be too hard to do. They did something similar with the Trooper/Acura some years later.

So, even though we have a 'public interest' non-commercial entity, we have to remember that doesn't mean it is altruistic, just well intended. Until it becomes a living, breathing, organization. Then it is a life form that follows the number 1 requirement: first, stay alive. Just like government when it gets to a certain size. Regardless of intent.

Sorry for the hijack. I realize that this thread was intended to point out that GM cars seem to have improved. I am glad to hear that. And it does seem that they have been able to concentrate on building better vehicles, as repulsive as the methods used to get there. Can't wait until it is again not held by the public, but publicly held stock (might buy a couple of shares for pure symbolism, if not a good value). And I have to admit, I have liked the look of most of the newly re-designed cars. Wished they would sell some stripper version of the Equinox line (awd, 4 cyl, manual, decent mileage). That would interest my Forester driving wife.

 

[Hematite]

I have to say that I was amused while reading this thread. In my opinion, every single negative charge leveled at Consumer Reports is completely valid. Without a doubt, I consider it the most useless, pathetic publication out there....just sayin'.

 

[phiferpharm]

For what it's worth, I have two Chevys- a Tahoe & Avalanche purchased two weeks apart. In the case of the Tahoe, it replaced a GMC Yukon that is still running with 200K on it, passed down through two kids. They have been pretty trouble free with only one recall for the Tahoe & Avalanche for screwed up washer heater wiring. I did think the "fix" of just detaching it was kind of Mickey Mouse, but at least it was not a major item.

Thats the good news- the bad news is all three developed cracks in dashboard at about the same spot - going from the passenger airbag cover to the defroster. The odd part is that it doesn't have anything to do with mileage. Each car now has widely varied mileage ranging from 30k to 88K to the Yukon. IMHO I gotta say, it is a design issue. I'll still replace with GMC, but order the really ugly aftermarket dash rug at purchase time, instead of after I get hacked off at the cracks

I started as a Ford person, but my experience with the Yukon moved me into the GMC column. I read the Consumer Reports stuff for years about not only automobiles, but the other stuff, and while I guess it helps to get specs and stuff, I really think getting real world experiences- like you see in TBN - gives you a much better feel for which way to go in purchasing.

 

[brokenot]

I have to say that I was amused while reading this thread. In my opinion, every single negative charge leveled at Consumer Reports is completely valid. Without a doubt, I consider it the most useless, pathetic publication out there....just sayin'.

Did you read the comment in my post about CR being open to suggestions? I'm not sticking up for them, I'm just sayin' that if anyone has any good ideas about how product opinions from consumers can be gathered, compiled, and delivered in a manner that will truly reflect a given products' reliability/ease of use/value for the dollar/etc., I'm sure CR would looooove to hear 'em.

Keep in mind that truly reflecting a product's pros and cons when comparing it to another product means only weighing relevant information. You'll have to come up with a way to weed out personal bias, misconception, ridiculous expectations, and so on.

Once you've accomplished that, then you'll need to develop a method by which everyone surveyed could come together and always mark the appropriate check box when queried about such things as, "On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate <insert specific category here>"

Good luck with that.

 

[Jimbrown]

I quit reading CR back in about 1970 when they claimed that a porsche 911 was an unsafe car due to handling. They determined that by a test wherby they drove down the road jerked the sterring wheel as far left or right as they could and wanted it to return to center on its own which of course the porsche was not designed to do it was designed to go where you point it.

 

[MESSMAKER]

I find myself in the minority. I think that CR is a great resource. Are they without fault. I am sure they have plenty. I have bought quite a few things, over the years, using them as the primary information source. It has seldom failed me. I would not consider buying a major household item or specific auto without, at least giving it a look, and if they tell me to avoid it. I probably would. I use it a bit like a movie review. If I think I might like and they say they did as well. I feel pretty confident. If they say it stinks. It is the rare exception that they miss it. The ones that fall in the middle can go either way.
When it comes to a lot of things, you only get info on the item that is owned by the soul that you ask. They usually do not have experience with several different current models. That is where head to head comparison is what you need to see. If two models are close, or if one shines in a specific area that is most important to you, it matters. Information is power and the more you have, the better decision you can make. To throw out CR, and say it has no value at all, is not correct.

 

[Travelover]

I find myself in the minority. I think that CR is a great resource. Are they without fault. I am sure they have plenty. I have bought quite a few things, over the years, using them as the primary information source. It has seldom failed me. I would not consider buying a major household item or specific auto without, at least giving it a look, and if they tell me to avoid it. I probably would. I use it a bit like a movie review. If I think I might like and they say they did as well. I feel pretty confident. If they say it stinks. It is the rare exception that they miss it. The ones that fall in the middle can go either way.
When it comes to a lot of things, you only get info on the item that is owned by the soul that you ask. They usually do not have experience with several different current models. That is where head to head comparison is what you need to see. If two models are close, or if one shines in a specific area that is most important to you, it matters. Information is power and the more you have, the better decision you can make. To throw out CR, and say it has no value at all, is not correct.

I agree. CR ain't perfect, but what are the reasonable alternatives? I often read their rating criteria, compare it to my own and make my own decision, but I find it to be an excellent thought starter.