Still Fishy? Consumer Reports responds to Pickup Comparo Controversy

[1931Chevy]

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/10/c...o-controversy/


Earlier this week we told you about a pickup truck comparison in the most recent issue of Consumer Reports that seemed a bit fishy. The comparison pitted the new 2007 Toyota Tundra against the 2007 Chevy Silverado, Ford F-150 and Dodge Ram. It was clearly a fight between the Tundra and Silverado from the get-go, since both were the only two completely new trucks in the test. The Tundra, however, seemed to have an advantage in that it was ordered up with the larger of its two engines, the 5.7L V8 producing 381 hp. The Silverado, while available with a more evenly matched 6.0L Vortec MAX V8, was ordered with a less powerful 5.3L V8 producing 315 hp. Not only that, but the Tundra benefited from a 4.30 rear axle ratio that provides better towing and acceleration than the 3.73 ratio in the Silverado, which sacrifices those qualities for better fuel economy. The Silverado, however, could've been ordered with a 4.30 rear axle ratio at no extra charge.

Well, the gentlefolks at CR recently posted an answer to everyone's questions about this particular half-ton pickup comparo on their blog, which you should go read by clicking here before going on. They explain that choosing equipment for vehicles involved in a comparison is a tricky thing that involves balancing the objective of several goals.

"In general, we want to test a representative vehicle that is comparable to other vehicles in the test group (and previously tested peer vehicles). We also typically test the version--powertrain and trim level--that most regular consumers will buy. "

[goochman]

ie, The Tundra has been getting alot of bad press and is losing most compo's to the Silverado - in defense of our friends at Toyota we tipped the scales a bit

[likearock00]

OR,

We at CR have been taking alot of flak over this unfair comparo. We really believe the Tundra is the greatest, because in every test we do Toyota's are the winner. Sorry, we don't know any better. Please don't cancel your subscriptions or slow any movements of money towards us, because the bribe money we recieve from Toyota can only go so far.

[Butz]

Blah Blah Blah, the usual CR Lies and Propaganda.

[Mr. Burns]

Originally Posted by likearock00

OR,

We at CR have been taking alot of flak over this unfair comparo. We really believe the Tundra is the greatest, because in every test we do Toyota's are the winner. Sorry, we don't know any better. Please don't cancel your subscriptions or slow any movements of money towards us, because the bribe money we recieve from Toyota can only go so far.

I doubt they receive bribe money from toyota. And most of their readers are toyonda owners anyway, so they wont lose subscriptions if they favor toyondas.

Honestly I dont know what to sat about this whole CR thing. I don't think they're biased, but then I see articles like this.

[XP300]

Originally Posted by Mr. Burns

Honestly I dont know what to sat about this whole CR thing. I don't think they're biased, but then I see articles like this.

Burnzie ....... I know you're too young to have been around in the Ralph Nader days, but Nader was a Consumer Union (CR Parent) board member. I'm sure you've heard about the GM/Nader law suit.

Joan Claybrook, president of Public (Comrade) Citizen, was another Nader associate. Just like Nader, she has never held a real job. She worked in the government for Carter, then went to not for profits, who pay no income tax. She was also on the board of Consumers Union.

The originator of the Car Book (published by Consumers Union) is Jack Gillis, another Ralph Nader associate. GM would not provide Gillis with cars to test when he started the Car Book, so he has never forgiven them ... or given GM's cars great ratings.

I could go on, but CR is biased out of a hatred for GM, corporations in general and capitolism

[tgagneguam]

Funny, I think the intent of Tom's post was to respond to [appropriate] criticism of their model selection. Rather than assuage those critical of the selections (and I'm betting many Toyota-philes aren't reasonable enough to acknowledge the problem), I think his post comes across more as defensive than logical. Normally, I don't get too excited about CR reviews; some of their stuff is reasonably thought-out and well-written enough. But this particular article is a bit much. That they "cannot" see the logic behind the criticism comes across simply as disingenuous; I know these people are smart enough to recognize the stack.

In other words, it's fine if you want to stack a comparison a certain way. But at least have the balls to stand by your decision. Otherwise, you come across as a bunch of spineless twits.

[jkennedy293]

What a total cop out by CR. They screwed up and don't have the cajones to own up to it.

[windvale]

I know that Consumer Reports is generally viewed as the anit-christ on this web site.

But what I found interesting is that in the CR review of the current Camry they pointed out that there were some ill-fitting interior panels, and interior workmanship not up to expected standard (my best recollection of their words w/o checking). If Toyota really is some sort of lackey for CR...why would they write such a thing about the Camry ?

Is it possible that CR is an honorable bunch, and just made an honest error on the Silverado/Tundra comparison - or is there a conspiracy here ?

Or do I just need to drink the Kool-Aid and shut up ?

[Chaz_23]

They don't have to receive bribe money. How about just "special offers" from Licksus on brand new cars for their "editors".

Originally Posted by Mr. Burns

I doubt they receive bribe money from toyota. And most of their readers are toyonda owners anyway, so they wont lose subscriptions if they favor toyondas.

Honestly I dont know what to sat about this whole CR thing. I don't think they're biased, but then I see articles like this.

[XCR440SP]

Sorry, but I disagree in that I think Consumer reports compared the right equipment.

Go look on the dealers lots and on sales volumes, the 5.3L is the engine in the majority of trucks, yes they do offer the 6.0L, but it is a small volume option, its like saying Dodge should have had a SRT 10 to be fair. I think that for the comparos it should be a 5.3L GM, 5.4L Ford, 5.7L Dodge and a camshaft eating 5.7L in the Toy since this is the real comparison that the average consumer will be making. If comparing Sport trucks then its different, I do think that a mention of the 6.0L availability would be good, but the test should have used the 5.3L.

Also on gearing, you can complain, but Toyota runs the 4.30's due to thier 6 speed transmission (double overdrive). GM/Ford have to live with 3.73's in most models due the limitation of the 4 speed.

All said, I disagree with the results as I wouldn't trust the toy for towing (look at cooling system, oil filter, other things that are put to the test in HD towing conditions, not just 0-60), but I do agree with the trucks that were tested.

[stick076]

Originally Posted by windvale

I know that Consumer Reports is generally viewed as the anit-christ on this web site.

But what I found interesting is that in the CR review of the current Camry they pointed out that there were some ill-fitting interior panels, and interior workmanship not up to expected standard (my best recollection of their words w/o checking). If Toyota really is some sort of lackey for CR...why would they write such a thing about the Camry ?

Is it possible that CR is an honorable bunch, and just made an honest error on the Silverado/Tundra comparison - or is there a conspiracy here ?

Or do I just need to drink the Kool-Aid and shut up ?

Don't drink the Kool-Aid....from either side.

[smokyn454]

Originally Posted by [I

"We also typically test the version--powertrain and trim level--that most regular consumers will buy. "[/i]

So that is like saying "we tested a Honda Accord vs. a Toyota Camry. More people buy the 4 cylinder accord and more people buy the V6 Camry. Now the Camry wins because it is smoother, faster and has more power."

WTF, who cares what combo is more popular? You can't compare two differently spec'd vehicles.

[smokyn454]

Originally Posted by XCR440SP

Sorry, but I disagree in that I think Consumer reports compared the right equipment.

Go look on the dealers lots and on sales volumes, the 5.3L is the engine in the majority of trucks, yes they do offer the 6.0L, but it is a small volume option, its like saying Dodge should have had a SRT 10 to be fair. I think that for the comparos it should be a 5.3L GM, 5.4L Ford, 5.7L Dodge and a camshaft eating 5.7L in the Toy since this is the real comparison that the average consumer will be making. If comparing Sport trucks then its different, I do think that a mention of the 6.0L availability would be good, but the test should have used the 5.3L.

You can't get a SRT-10 in 4x4 and it is a $50,000 specialty truck that you can't find on every lot.

I don't know where you get the 6.0L is available in limited quantity. Half the 1/2 tons at my dealer are 5.3's and 6.0's. It is also funny you mention all other trucks with their top-of-the-line engines but think that Chevy should not have theirs?

[BlueMontreal]

CR made a comparison for commuters trucks. That's why fuel economy is so important (BTW, Toyota's 5.7 L IS impressive, minus the already-fixed camshafts issue..) and occasional towing capacity. CR don't give credit for a fully boxed frame or the choice GM have for their trucks. There reliability repport are made by CR subscribers and most of them probably dislike domestics.