[ponchoman49]

Only at Consumer Reports does a car get a top score but not get recommended. They always have to throw something in like reliability is predicted as much worse than average because a car from the 80's from the same manufacturer also scored poorly or that fit and finish was bad. Apparently they look the other way when a Camry comes through with mis-aligned interior parts such as glove box doors, center consoles, flimsy A-pillar trim and lots of hard cheap plastic trim. And this is from one car dealer looking at 5 brand new 2013's. Have you heard one report giving any Toyota a dig for fit and finish issues? Of course not because the Toyota representative over at CR would never let that go through to print!

 

[robsBU08]

"Poor fit and finish"? Hmm.

I've been reading about Fords mini-scandal around mileage figures on the Hybrids, but isn't the figure on the sticker the the responsibility of the EPA?

Yes and no. The EPA actually only tests about 15 to 20 percent of new cars for mileage. The rest are usually good faith estimates by the manufactures.

 

[spd98]

if its new they wont recommend it until a year of reliability data is in.

Unless it's a Toyota. Then they will reccomend it before even testing it, and claim it's based on previous exp.

 

[zeobandit]

CR is incredibly biased against American cars. I don't pay any attention to what they say.

 

[the_smurf2008]

OHH MYYYY
*Thanks George*

That over with (Someone had to)

The fusion, as with many of the Ford line ,will sell. It is the person's first impression that catches attention. The Fusion does that. Fusion looks like an Aston Matin. It's the car that has a sporty look and feel, and marketed on TV has being a sporty car for young active people and families. Ford has taken a chance of cutting edge styling and I think it is working. This car is anything but plain.
I have found that the people who are most likely to buy a car like this are not readers of CR. They will however see the ads talking about the car in glowing terms.
It 's not til the car is in enough consumers hands that any issues really become evident. So even though CR is MEH, Chevrolet needs to really step up if we are to compete. Like it or not Ford, on the surface, did good.

 

[skylark68]

Big deal. CR is irrelevant.

God could create the perfect car for humanity, badge the car a Toyota and it would receive the highest praise from CR. The same perfect car could be badged a Chevrolet or Ford and CR would find something utterly wrong with it.

 

[Bigbee60]

if its new they wont recommend it until a year of reliability data is in.

CR recommended the 2012 Camry in its first year based on "history of the vehicle in general". In essence, the engines and running gear was mostly unchanged from the 2011, they just slapped some new body panels on the same frame hard points and gussied up the interior. Chevy did the same for the 2008 Malibu and got recommended. Not hard to see a trend at CR where clean sheet designs are not treated warmly, but warmed over updates are.

 

[Ed753]

CR doesnt comment on value in its reviews. Price is not a factor in their ratings, they only rank cars by size class and thus you will often see cars in the same category differing in price by 10 or 20 grand. CR is the only "consumer" oriented publication that doesn't factor in price when talking about cars.

You sure about that?

Here are comments from CR online in Best Family Sedan:

"The Malibu is also no great value. Even our moderately equipped 1LT cost $26,030, notably more than higher-rated competitors. Sales incentives seem inevitable."


"If you want an affordable family sedan with all-wheel drive, the Legacy is the only game in town. It’s also a nice, value-packed ride, with a spacious interior and good fuel economy. Where it falls a bit short is in refinement and performance."

 

[PhishPhood]

"Poor fit and finish"? Hmm.

I've been reading about Fords mini-scandal around mileage figures on the Hybrids, but isn't the figure on the sticker the the responsibility of the EPA?

Yes and No.

The EPA mileage tests and the values resulting from these tests are actually done by the car makers themselves in their own labs according to the EPA's protocols. The results are then submitted to the EPA which can do their own testing if they wish to verify the vehicle maker's results. The EPA's testing is done on a 'spot' basis, not on every model. The values determined by these tests are the only ones that a vehicle maker can legally use in any of its promotions.

OTOH Ford has been known, the last gen Fusion Hybrid for example, to be accused of 'gaming' the tests which is legal (?) but questionable....especially if the real world values fall far below the test values. The last gen FFH never came close to achieving its EPA values but Ford continued to use them throughout the vehicle's life cycle.

OTOH Honda had to face the music with its Civic Hybrid when it was taken to court in a class action by owners who claimed that even though Honda was required to use the EPA values in its promotions Honda knew that the Civic Hybrid could never achieve those values in day-to-day driving.

Now with the Gen 2 FFH apparently having the same difficulty meeting the EPA values it too may face the wrath of its customers...in court.

As for Consumer Reports, it's just another data point to consider. CR readily acknowledges that no vehicles in the entire market ever meet the EPA values on the window sticker according to CR's 'real world' testing. CR buys actual retail units from local dealers in New England and then runs them around it's own testing grounds according to it's own City and Highway protocols. The values it finds are always far below the EPA laboratory values found by the vehicle makers'.

As an example a typical V6 midsizer that gets 25 mpg CITY on the EPA test generally will get 13-15 mpg on the CR 'real world' test track. Why the difference? It is CR's mission to find flaws in products and advertising in order to protect the consumer. Thus when it does its own testing CR often uses the worst case scenarios in driving. In it's view a typical consumer's CITY driving would be..
..take the kids 3 miles to school, wait with the engine running, drive 3 miles home.
..drive 2 miles to shop, drive 2 miles to pick up the kids, wait with the engine running, drive 3 miles home
..drive 5 miles to grandmother's house, drive 5 miles home.

No vehicle on the road ( excluding the plug-ins ) can achieve the EPA values under these conditions. The engine never has time enough to warm up.

 

[ausrutherford]

CR also dissed the original iPhone...how did that turn out?

 

[yamahr1]

I thought the problem with "not recommended" is that the design is too new to establish reliability?

Not defending CR, mind you, as they suck.

 

[KingElvis]

"Poor fit and finish"? Hmm.

I've been reading about Fords mini-scandal around mileage figures on the Hybrids, but isn't the figure on the sticker the the responsibility of the EPA?

I think they test most models themselves using EPA parameters. EPA only double checks these figures on their own in rare cases IIRC.

 

[hydrogen]

I think they test most models themselves using EPA parameters. EPA only double checks these figures on their own in rare cases IIRC.

Interesting, so there is a grey area. Do these factory claimed ratings contribute to a manufacture's CAFE standard?

 

[efile28]

Was kind of surprised to hear that. But I guess "looks" isn't everything. The fusion is definitly a "looker" in my eyes. In regards to myfordtouch....why don't auto manufacturers just leave the hvac controls alone? Stick to push button\rotary knobs for those crucial functions. Having to go through multiple screens to access the simplest of functions is baffling and dangerous.

 

[AMcA]

Don't ya love Consumer Reports: best fuel economy ever our of a mid-size sedan. But they still bash it for not meeting its EPA estimates?

 

[G8Montana]

CR is just about as credible as tabloid papers, they check their facts again and again.......they are fabulous for appliances did I mention? Everything else is just bzbzbzbzbzbzbzbz

 

[mchicha]

CR is nuts

 

[T'Cal]

CR isn't a source I consider when purchasing a vehicle. There's little real info that I can't get elsewhere so I do the leg work of reading reviews in magazines, in newspapers, and online. I then go out and actually do a hands on comparison of vehicles that I'm considering. I use the EPA ratings as a guideline realizing the city mileage is probably a bit high and the highway mileage is obtainable and sometimes even surpassable (new word!). As for quality, I gauge that myself by looking at seems, paint finish, interior surfaces, levers and handles, switches and buttons, etc. and I decide what's good and what's not.

As for Ford, I own a few (an '11, an '08, and a '98) and I can tell you that the late model vehicles are very well built with quality materials. I have the MFT in my Explorer and since the update a year ago, it has worked flawlessly. If you don't want that type of interface, don't get it but if you do get it, know that you may input info and select features manually too. I attended the Detroit NAIAS this past weekend and the Fusion was the car that impressed me the most with its beautiful sheet metal, its high quality feel and look inside, and its available features for the price. This handsome car is a bargain!

 

[1487]

Interesting, so there is a grey area. Do these factory claimed ratings contribute to a manufacture's CAFE standard?

CAFE standards are based on totally flawed older EPA ratings so the cars sold today are rated MUCH higher for CAFE than what you see on the sticker. The entire system is rigged to make it look like cars are more efficient than they really are.

 

[1487]

Unless it's a Toyota. Then they will reccomend it before even testing it, and claim it's based on previous exp.

well a few years ago they stopped doing it for Toyotas because a few Toyotas debuted with lower than average quality. They still do it for Honda, Suburu, Nissan, etc. Nothing they do is scientific or logical, they change the rules as they go along.