Consumer Reports = INFORMATION. evo, C&D, etc = ENTERTAINMENT

"PardonMyFlemish16" (TheCoolKid) 01/31/2014 at 08:40 • Filed to: None

0

15

CR hate = misguided and unwarranted. If I am looking for a daily driver for my wife I don't care what it's lap time around VIR is or whether it has an under/oversteer balance at the limit. Hell the biggest factor that led me to my Z was long distance comfort- the only place it fails is with tire noise. When I research a car or motorcycle to buy, I want to know if it's fun to drive, but I also want to know whether it's going to be cheap to run and that it will start up every morning. Entertainment mags are good for the fun to drive part but pretty much USELESS for the day to day part. Even those mags long term tests aren't worth much... they only test so many cars, generally only test performance cars, and only have them for the year. The only mag I would say is the exception to that is evo with their buyer's guides; and man, there are some real factory lemons out there people go ga ga over. And they still mainly focus on expensive, high performance cars.

I'm not saying entertainment mags don't have any value. I read them all the time. I'm subscribed to /DRIVE, MT and other car channels on Youtube as well as a few mags at home. They are fun to read. But that does not necessarily mean they are full of useful info for making a decision on buying a car.

CR actually saved me from buying a boring cookie cutter car for my wife... I was set on buying a 1st gen Matrix, when I saw that the MKV Rabbit was on their recommended list. No it's not a Miata or 911 GT3 but it's got real charm, eats up highway miles nice and has more character than something like a Corolla LE or Civic LX- both of which are not bad cars either.

spanfucker retire bitch > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 09:13

1

I've never understood the hate for Consumer Reports. There are few if any other organizations out there that do long-term testing on so many hundreds of vehicles. Hell, it's thanks to CR that I purchased my Mazda3 - a perennial Jalop favorite for the compact car segment. It was one of their most highly recommended and between them and the other reviews I read online - that was how I determined my choice. But the fact that CR had real long-term numbers to back up their review definitely helped when looking for a DD.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 09:24

1

Yup. CR is a great resource, completely private and independent, completely committed to the consumer, and I will always use it as part of my decision-making process when buying a car.

blargolapse1 > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 09:30

0

Everything in CR is to be taken with a grain of salt.

There's a story that in one issue, CR rated the Eagle Talon a recommended rating and the Mitsubishi Eclipse a poor rating, when both cars were made in the same plant, on the same line, differing only by badges and trim.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 09:32

1

I don't care much for CR because they have a tendency (or have in the past) to rigidly lock down any analysis from perspectives other than those of an enthusiast - this would be fine, but because their "take" on a car will then be informed by another, sometimes even enthusiast-contrarian perspective, it can and has led to begged questions and non sequitur in their analyses. They're certainly one of several useful resources, perhaps - the stodgy realist of the family who will help keep you from doing anything outright irresponsible - but primary source, the Consumer Reports I remember? Never.

JACU - I've got bonifides. > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 09:35

1

The original Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon were decent driving little cars for their day, due in particular to the notes Chrysler took when dissecting VW's very successful Golf/Rabbit, even to the extent of using VW motors in the earliest versions.

While C&D lauded them, CR did their usual appliance-grade testing. In one test, they traveled in a straight line, then jerked the steering wheel over as far as they could and then let it go. The steering wheel unwound but then wound back up in the other direction, going slightly farther into opposite-lock. This set up an oscillation much like a tank-slapper on a motorcycle, with the result being much tire-screeching, body-leaning and general directional mayhem.

They pronounced the Omni/Horizon pair as "unacceptable". No one else seemed to have the trouble CR did when they tested it. Probably because no one thought that anyone in their right mind would jerk the wheel as far as they could over to one side and then let it go. Chrysler "fixed" the problem by making the steering wheel lighter and putting a steering damper in the system (if it works for bikes, why not cars).

My rant here is that maybe CR isn't doing such stupid shit now, but they sure did at one time.

CobraJoe > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 09:43

0

Consumer reports is a good resource, but I don't think it should be the only source.

After all, reliability is worried about too much. Generally speaking, most newer cars are pretty reliable, and there's always the chance of even the most reliable brand breaking down. Buying value can be a factor, but discounts and trade in values change from dealer to dealer and to time of the year.

In the end, I wouldn't let a slight difference in CR scores sway you from getting a car you want, even if it's going to be for a commuter. After all, shouldn't commuting be as fun as possible?

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > CobraJoe 01/31/2014 at 10:01

0

I've seen CR fall to the "reliability" trap of "hard to use features are unreliable". They also have some very odd ideas about what constitutes reliability overall. That, and some fundamentally bizarre weighting of this or that feature, particularly a susceptibility to this or that trend object as a "must have" feature... not really a cheerleader for them.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > JACU - I've got bonifides. 01/31/2014 at 10:02

0

They've found other stupid shit to do, don't worry.

PardonMyFlemish16 > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 01/31/2014 at 12:23

0

No offense but it seems like you haven't read much CR. Here are some summaries from road tests they did on various sporty cars:

135i (their top sports coupe pick):

"The 135i is quick, well balanced, and a lot of fun to drive. The engine is smooth and powerful and returns relatively good fuel economy. Steering and brakes are excellent, and the cabin is well finished and quiet, with comfortable front seats. But its four-seat, two-door configuration limits practicality, the rear is cramped, and some controls are complicated."

WRX/STi:

"Like the rest of the Impreza line, the WRX STi delivers impressive acceleration, braking, and handling, but those talents don't tell the whole story. This WRX STi doesn't live up to the road-rocket standard set by the previous-generation car. It isn't as exciting to drive , the steering isn't as sharp, and the shifter and clutch require significant effort. The interior, though, is roomier and nicer all around. As they do in the old car, the sport seats provide good support, and the hatchback design adds practicality. Along with a new four-door sedan body style, Subaru says the 2011 models have a retuned and stiffer suspension."

Say what???? CR judging a sporty car by how fun it is to drive????????

Mustang GT

" The Mustang GT does more than go fast in a straight line. Agile handling and good brakes, a tolerable ride and comfortable seats, easy access and a good view out all contribute to a satisfying, enjoyable drive. It doesn't hurt that the V8 is a hell-raiser that sounds great and that the six-speed manual has short throws and an easy shift action. (The V6 also provides decent oomph.) The rear seat is very tight, but not impossible to use, and fit and finish is mostly good. Expect a redesign later in 2014."

Etc etc. Nothing "stodgy" here. They don't hate fun cars. CR looks at cars for what they are and evaluates them in that context, but also looks at them beyond track/test numbers and evaluates them for daily usage and ownership. I haven't read any car reviews from them that sounded out of place. I am pretty sure one of the things they knocked the Civic off its pedestal for was not being fun to drive.

So yea, you should probably check out a recent copy or browse their website. They have been doing a much better job of evaluating different kinds of cars in their respective contexts for a few years now.

PardonMyFlemish16 > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 01/31/2014 at 12:24

0

How would you know what they are doing? When's the last time you read an issue?

PardonMyFlemish16 > blargolapse1 01/31/2014 at 12:25

0

Nearly all the magazines folks treat as gospel have undergone significant change over the last ~15 years. Why judge CR today on what it was doing 15 years ago?

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 12:28

0

Early 2000s. I thoroughly admit they've likely improved, but what I encountered then was abysmal.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 12:39

0

Blurbs are better than what I remember, but I don't find them terribly informative. Those blurbs speak mostly in generalities or banalities - without the flavor that could come from a more "stupid" magazine's puff piece. I appreciate that they're being even-handed, but there's not very much there, and it seems to settle on odd things (obsession over shifter feel - it's a matter of taste, "two door configuration limits practicality" of a sports coupe? You're shitting me. "Controls are complicated" Dalek: EXPLAIN) and most of what they're saying in them doesn't rise above what you'd pick up on an informal test drive "nice interior, comfortable, sounds good).

I appreciate long-term shakedowns and that they raise issues of comfort that might be glossed over, but sorry: they still sound stodgy. Not as transparently so, but like a stodgy *person* was asked to write something and then punch it up to the point of ridiculousness.

A good resource, sure. Not sold on them in general (though I'm not a C&D man either these days...)

PardonMyFlemish16 > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 01/31/2014 at 12:59

0

The style of writing is one thing. I thought you meant stodgy as in dismissive or unyielding to sporty cars. The point is, they aren't "enthusiast contrarian"; and ignoring all perspectives that don't come from an enthusiast bend seems kind of silly to me. Is your enthusiasm so fragile that it can be threatened by a positive review of a Corolla?

In any case, CR is a good resource for checking out cars from an actual ownership perspective, rather than the, quite frankly, somewhat banal and formulaic press puff pieces that pass for auto journalism these days. CR has a clear objective and format in their pieces but still remains to provide, IMO, valuable insights into cars you definitely won't get from something like C&D. Mags like C&D use the same format. Talk about the last car. Run through the specs and changes. Glow over the driving experience. Throw in a few weak "only thing keeping this from being perfect would be the cupholders". Wash, rinse, repeat. But excused, because it is telling you what you want to hear from the perspective you prefer.

W/e. Again, CR is an information tool, and really shouldn't be compared to entertainment magazines. I would go as far as to say that for objective functionality it's much more useful than something like Motor Trend. You should give one a look when you get the chance.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > PardonMyFlemish16 01/31/2014 at 13:41

0

Enthusiasm... positive review of a Corolla?

Not at all. I have the solid impression from my prior exposure, however, that that positive review of a Corolla might come with a recommendation to buy over a competitor based on Toyota's history of reliability. I could almost swear to you that I encountered something that eye-rolling in my last sally, and know for a fact that a CR article I read disparaged an entertainment system far out of proportion to any realistic flaw *with the car*. The complaint varied, but things I didn't like tended to be based most often in things of weighting: always missing the forest for the trees by knocking the on-road performance of 4wds, the practicality of small cars, the economy of large ones - aka "shit we already know". That, and making looney statements born of technical ignorance. From what I've seen, that's been curtailed of late, but its specter still looms.

I also don't demand an enthusiast bent per se, and that brings me to my next point: enthusiast pieces don't have to be divorced from practical concern. Enthusiasts need not be wild-eyed dreamers any more than practical car buyers need to be bores. Heck, I'd really just like people who understand what a given car is *about*. The best enthusiast pieces I've encountered, actually, are those in British mags for classic car hunting, but that's another story. Not a new car market polluted with the advertising dollar, for one. C&D is not that magazine, which is why I don't subscribe - but I'd rather read it than CR...

Again, C&D doesn't tell me what I want to hear *as such*, nor is it from the perspective I prefer *as such*, and there's a reason I don't take it seriously. Even in better days (the mid-90s) it advised *for* the buying of the Dodge Intrepid, something we know now would have been a maintenance boondoggle for anyone listening - and one with serious driving flaws as well. However, in making that recommendation, it *jokingly* noted the practicality of the trunk space by putting in three people with the rear seat folded down, and noted that its performance/mileage balance was good or excellent for a full size car (all true). Some things that CR would likely have highlighted as well, but it wouldn't have been fun.

I don't ask that CR be an entertainment magazine, but if produced as the functional equivalent of an anti-entertainment magazine (which it once was) by extremely dull and sometimes confused people, I'm more inclined to dismiss it as an information tool. And, if its information is less useful than that in an entertainment magazine in some respects, that's a problem. Their attempts to granulate those pieces of information typically obtained through an entertainment magazine (e.g. does this car contain "the fizz") seem to be less than good.

The fact that more traditional car magazines are at such a nadir (enough that I won't buy one) does not excuse facts being presented in an inscrutable manner - because if the facts aren't useful to me, it's simply not going to be of interest. I'll give one a look, to be sure, but I'm still in the frame of mind that the presentation at, say, Edmunds on a fairly fresh used car is more of interest, less vague, and generally better to my liking.