[PMC the 1st]

If we look at the July 2008 issue of Consumer Reports ("CR"), we come to find out the stark truth: Toyota wasn't happy with CR's 2005 advertisement of the Prius, so CR was more careful in promoting the Prius this model year.
Looking at CR July 2008 issue, we find out that CR bumped the Prius up from a mediocre score of 68 in the 2005 Toyota advertisement up to a very lofty score of 80, placing it at the top of the list, right behind the Elantra (#1) and the Honda Civic (#2) in teh July 2008 advertisement.
Toyota CEO: "That's more like it. Consumer Reports, you're finally doing what we're paying you to do."

What has changed with the Prius since 2005? Absolutely nothing, save for a new set of tires. Oh, and the 2008 Prius now gets stability control, just like every other sedan out there. The new tires and traction control change the name of the car to "Toyota Prius Touring."

What has changed at CR? Well, usually, the older a car gets the lower it gets rated. But not with Toyota. Since Toyota is paying big fistfuls of hush-hush money to CR, CR now has increased the Prius's score from an average 68 to an astonishing, stratospheric 80, placing the car comfortably in the "Excellent" rating section!

With the Prius being one of the highest-rated cars CR has tested recently, you'd expect CR to have only glowing compliments for the car. Not so. In fact, if we search very carefully, we'll once again find out the truth regarding CR and the Prius. And the truth of the matter is is that the Prius is an average compact car, with exception to fuel economy.

From CR's logbook, gentlemen:

This time around we're testing a Touring model with stability control ($23,220) to see if it improves the Prius' handling. What have we learned over the past few months driving it? Is the Prius just a rolling science project or is it a real car? Read on for our test teams' initial feedback:

1. "First impression isn't too hot, but this car grows on you."
2. "Switching from electric power to gas makes the engine shudder to life; I don't remember our last Prius doing that."
3. "Not impressive to drive (stiff ride, poor steering feel)."
4. "This car was more amazing when we tested it in '04."
5. "Transmission selector makes you push forward for reverse and pull back to go forward? (I remember complaining about that arrangement in another vehicle with the initials 'B.M.W.')"
6. "One display screen for all secondary functions is ridiculous."
7. "I spent too much time switching from screen to screen when I should be looking at the road."
8. "All this software to calculate 'instant' and 'overall' fuel economy but no 'distance to empty?'"
9. "Sub-par driving position - plenty of room, but the [steering] wheel is too far away and the dead pedal is badly angled and too close."
10. "Visibility is OK, but there are lots of pillars and that odd back window."
11. "Great packaging for four people and lots of luggage space for what is a small car."
12. "Good rear-seat room for kids."
13. "40+ mpg is still amazing."

As you can see, while the Prius doesn't deliver an engaging driving experience, it delivers fuel economy in spades. ("A genius of a car, but too bad it's not fun to drive" said one engineer.) There's enough substance here to help you understand why this car continues to be all the rage for environmentally-focused people. And I think this line really sums up what we feel about the Prius thus far: "An impressive, ground-breaking product, but far from perfect."

AND THIS COMPACT CAR THAT THEY ADMIT IS MEDIOCRE IS RATED HIGHER THAN ALMOST EVERY OTHER COMPACT CAR THEY TEST!!!
In other words, CR prominently advertises the Prius in their ratings where everyone can see it, but if we dig deep we find out CR says it actually rides like a car that would ordinarily get an 'average' or 'below average' rating.

The question now isn't whether or not CR is getting paid under-the-table by Toyota, but by how much.
I think it's in the tens of millions of dollars per reporting year...

 

[PMC the 1st]

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/car...-prius-to.html

 

[Mr. Burns]

Hmm then maybe toyota should step up their bribing of CR, you know after they stopped recommending the Camry V6 and the Tundra because they were below average reliability?
http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/news/toyota/tundra/crreliability/slips.html

 

[marinerbc]

Hmm then maybe toyota should step up their bribing of CR, you know after they stopped recommending the Camry V6 and the Tundra because they were below average reliability?
http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/news/toyota/tundra/crreliability/slips.html

The truck that's doing it all didn't have its bills paid for it at CR, you mean? Guess it didn't do it all.

Toyota will open the purse strings, not to worry. They won't have a better truck than a Silverado or an F-150, but they'll have a bigger slush fund for it.

 

[FenwickHockey65]

Consumer Reports is, as Bob Lutz likes to say, "A total crock of D).

 

[PMC the 1st]

I wonder why CR even ranks the Prius Touring in the first place.

Consumer Reports' Champion says the magazine buys "the most popular model in a particular car."

Last time I checked, the Prius Touring is not the most popular model. The Prius base is.
From here:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/17/news/companies/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm

 

[F14CRAZY]

Consumer Reports is, as Bob Lutz likes to say, "A total crock of D).

haha

I don't mean to take sides with GMI members like this but IFCAR has NO basis to defend CR on this one. I've been following your other thread too PMC, and I congratulate you with sticking with what you believe in

 

[PMC the 1st]

haha

I've been following your other thread too PMC

Did you see the awesome pic of the Buick Enclave I posted there? Just plain awesome that GM kept so close to the concept...

 

[GMC-70]

Hmmm--just another reason why I stopped my subscription to CR over 15 years ago----I saw the problems then and apparently not much has changed.

If some of these CR accusitions do turn out to be true it could very well be the key to changing perceptions in many peoples minds.

 

[PMC the 1st]

Here's more Toyota advertising. I went to a Consumer Reports blog found at random and I found an article on the Tahoe Hybrid. Right after their flunkie review of the Tahoe, they ran this little advertisement:

If fuel economy is high on your priority list and a midsized SUV suits your needs, then you might consider the Toyota Highlander Hybrid ($44,000 in Limited trim). It's a much more refined vehicle overall than the Tahoe and averages 24 mpg.

Even though a midsized SUV doesn't suit my needs -- if a midsized SUV suited my needs, I'd be reading about midsized SUV's, not hybrid full-sized SUV's.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...ew/chevrolet-tahoe-hybrid-suv-first-drive.htm

 

[PMC the 1st]

More advertising, this time a very deceptive; if not downright fraudulent advertisement for Honda at the end:

Even though G.M. touts its new full-sized Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon Hybrids as "green" machines, buyers haven't exactly stampeded dealerships. According to a recent article in The New York Times, "G.M. has sold about 1,100 of its Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon hybrids since their introduction in January…[a] pace [that's] well behind its goal of 12,000 sales a year, and a fraction of the more than 100,000 hybrids sold so far in the United States this year."
We were eager to find out if this new hybrid really could make sizeable fuel economy improvements over the conventional Tahoe we last tested, which got a deplorable 14 mpg overall. Our well-equipped "Summit White" 4WD Hybrid stickered for a cool $55,585. So far, we’ve put nearly 3,000 miles on it; here's a look inside the logbook:

1. "Hybrid system works smoothly…even used no [gas] engine for a couple of miles of 0-20-0 mpg driving."
2. "18.3 mpg overall isn't great, but it's [obviously] better than the non-hybrid version." [Note: other drivers logged 16-17, 17.5, 18.6, and 20.8 mpg]
3. "Ridiculously low mpg…and this is 'green'? This gets tax incentives and the Toyota Corolla doesn’t? Insane."
4. "Ride is stiffer than regular Tahoe.” [But other opinions said: "Rides well and easy to navigate despite its massive size."]
5. "Brakes are very touchy, and then very hard."
6. "Steering has hardly any feedback."
7. "Feels heavy and slow reacting even in casual driving."
8. "Gee, can you tell it’s a hybrid? Our truck has more stickers and badges than a NASCAR racer…gets attention, though."
9. "Very quiet interior and comfortable seats."
10. "No power recline/lumbar for the seats and no powered tailgate is cheap for the crazy $55K sticker."
11. "Third-row seats steal virtually all the cargo space."
12. "Want to get [similar] fuel economy, seat eight and tow 4,500 pounds? Buy a Honda Pilot and save $15K."

Look for a full road test soon.

"The Tahoe Hybrid gets 20/20. The Honda Pilot gets 15/20. Hardly "similar fuel economy." --PMC​

Compare Old and New EPA MPG Estimates
2007 Honda Pilot 4WD

Automatic 5-spd
6 Cylinders
3.5 Liters
Regular Gasoline
Look up another car
New MPG tests are more realistic
New EPA MPG

Old EPA MPG

15
City
17
Combined
20
Hwy
_________________________________________________________​

2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid 4WD
Hybrid Vehicle

New EPA MPG
New MPG tests are more realistic
Regular Gasoline
20
City
20
Combined
20
Hwy​

.​

 

[Mr. Burns]

The save 15k part is important.

 

[PMC the 1st]

On this CR blog we learn that out of four "experts", two of them would buy a Buick Enclave, one would buy a Honda Pilot and one would buy a Toyota Highlander even though the Toyota Highlander is rated substantially higher than the Buick Enclave in their mainstream "expert" testing...
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/suvs/

 

[PMC the 1st]

The save 15k part is important.

The save the planet part is more important. And more relevant.
The most important part? Me revealing more advertisements for Honda and Toyota...

 

[PMC the 1st]

Lol, even though they rate the Big Three new crossovers from GM rather low (lower than a Toyota Highlander means it must be pretty crummy), CR had some interesting things to say about the Saturn Outlook. Take a peek:

When I wrote "Is the Sun Setting on Saturn?" in our original blog from the 2006 Detroit Auto Show, I honestly wasn't sure where this GM division was going. Since then, we've been mildly impressed with the Auras we've tested; the Aura only lacks at least average reliability data to be CR Recommended. We also have a Saturn Sky Red Line in our test fleet, which we feel is noticeably better than previously tested Pontiac Solstice, upon which it's based.
So, what is our outlook on the Outlook? Is this SUV/minivan/wagon helping to revive the once sizzling Saturn brand? We have posted a Just In report in the blog, and recently added a First Look as the Saturn motors its way through our test regimen on its way to a complete road test. We've seen the queries in our Forums asking about the Outlook, (discuss Saturns here) so we present our candid test notes from the logbook to provide even more insight:

1. "Very nice ride, handling, and steering."
2. "The car feels sluggish on the highway due to the transmission shift logic. The trans goes into high gear very early and is reluctant to kick down when the cruise control is set."
3. "Very quiet and well-isolated from the road."
4. "Feels far smaller than it really is to drive."
5. "Very comfortable seats and a good looking interior."
6. "Third-row seat access is pretty good; the seat is truly useable."
7. "Only complaints: Rear sill is still WAY too high, blocking rear vision; tiny climate controls; and long reach to the radio's tune knob."
8. "Lower LATCH anchors are tucked away too tightly against the seatback cushions, making hooking child safety seat straps very difficult."
9. "[At 1,669 miles] there's some rattles now appearing, but still impresses as just the right size SUV for the family."
10. "This car does about 80 percent of what a Chevrolet Suburban does and drives almost as well as a Cadillac SRX."
11. "I prefer this over [most] luxury SUVs."
12. "I'd buy this over a Honda Pilot or Acura MDX."
13. "A stunning achievement for GM, fully realized out of the box and you don't need to buy a loaded version to get all the good stuff."
14. "GM has a real winner here - an SUV with the room of a minivan and the driving experience of a car. It's much like the Mercedes-Benz GL but $30K cheaper."

Other than a few gripes, we're quite impressed so far from this clean-sheet effort from GM. Check the August issue of Consumer Reports magazine to see how it stacks up against other three-row car-based SUVs, including the new Mazda CX-9, the updated Chrysler Pacifica, and the Hyundai Veracruz.

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/suvs/

 

[RoGuE]

On their review of the Hybrid Tahoe, how do they only get 16-17 overall? They must have been flooring it from every single stoplight. We get 14.5-15 mpg in all city in our Suburban.

 

[PMC the 1st]

I have just found my first instance of documented fraud at Consumer Reports; evidence of fraud that can be taken to court and won by GM. Here CR says the Highlander Hybrid gets 24 MPG when advertising for Toyota and was printed in 2008:

If fuel economy is high on your priority list and a midsized SUV suits your needs, then you might consider the Toyota Highlander Hybrid ($44,000 in Limited trim). It's a much more refined vehicle overall than the Tahoe and averages 24 mpg.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...ew/chevrolet-tahoe-hybrid-suv-first-drive.htm

Here they list the same Highlander Hybrid, only this time they say it only gets 22 MPG:

The Hybrid version is just as nice but gets an estimated 22 mpg, four better than the non-hybrid version.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/.../overview/toyota-highlander-hybrid-suv-ov.htm

When CR tests the 2008 Toyota Highlander hybrid it gets 22 MPG, combined. Yet when they advertise the Highlander Hybrid against the Tahoe Hybrid as is the case above, they alledge 24 MPG, combined.
I see no reason why GM should wait any further in pursuing litigation against Consumers Union. They now have documented proof of fraud.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/02/09/036692.html

 

[69Firebird400]

PMC, since you are convinced that Toyota is bribing Consumer Reports (the same magazine who announced a few months ago that they will not longer automatically recommend new Toyota products without reliability data), would you be prepared to defend yourself in a libel lawsuit if they chose to take you to court over your statements?

It's an obvious fact that CR tends to prefer Toyotas and Hondas, all things being equal. However, absent any receipts, wire taps, an actual money trail, etc. between the two entities, you have no proof of any sort of payoff between Toyota and CR. Lucky for you, they probably have no idea who you are, but if they felt like it, I bet they could sue you and win. Circumstantial evidence such as a rating changing between 2004 and 2008 is not proof that money exchanged hands.

I dunno, perhaps the average consumer's priorities are different in 2008 when gas is $4 per gallon than they were in 2004 when gas was $1.75 per gallon. I drove a Prius for a week, and while I'd never want to drive one every day because of the lack of power, etc., it seems like a hell of a lot more desirable vehicle to me today than it did in January when I drove it. I didn't baby it, and got over 40 miles per gallon. Since the one I drove wasn't a Touring model, and its handling sucked, maybe the bigger wheels do make a difference in the car's handling.

Since you are convinced the cars are identical, I'm assuming that you drove both a 2004 non-Touring and a 2008 Touring with ESC back-to-back, right?

BTW, I love your new avatar.

 

[PMC the 1st]

PMC, since you are convinced that Toyota is bribing Consumer Reports (the same magazine who announced a few months ago that they will not longer automatically recommend new Toyota products without reliability data), would you be prepared to defend yourself in a libel lawsuit if they chose to take you to court over your statements?

Woohoo! Heck yes!!!
It'd be a dream come true.

It's an obvious fact that CR tends to prefer Toyotas and Hondas, all things being equal. However, absent any receipts, wire taps, an actual money trail, etc. between the two entities, you have no proof of any sort of payoff between Toyota and CR. Lucky for you, they probably have no idea who you are,

What do you mean? Just look at my IP address. Everyone knows "SDSU" stands for "San Diego State University..."

but if they felt like it, I bet they could sue you and win.

Lol...

I dunno, perhaps the average consumer's priorities are different in 2008 when gas is $4 per gallon than they were in 2004 when gas was $1.75 per gallon. I drove a Prius for a week.

As I said in the other thread. I like the Prius. Perhaps more than most people on this forum. It's a well-engineered hybrid. Then again, I am a geek, you know...

BTW, I love your new avatar.

Thanx! I like it too. It's apparently apropos...

 

[69Firebird400]

I have just found my first instance of documented fraud at Consumer Reports; evidence of fraud that can be taken to court and won by GM. Here CR says the Highlander Hybrid gets 24 MPG when advertising for Toyota and was printed in 2008:

Here they list the same Highlander Hybrid, only this time they say it only gets 22 MPG:


When CR tests the 2008 Toyota Highlander hybrid it gets 22 MPG, combined. Yet when they advertise the Highlander Hybrid against the Tahoe Hybrid as is the case above, they alledge 24 MPG, combined.
I see no reason why GM should wait any further in pursuing litigation against Consumers Union. They now have documented proof of fraud.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/02/09/036692.html

Your second CR link also says it has shown about 23 mpg so far, according to the trip computer (end of the 4th paragraph):

So far, we’ve been getting about 23 mpg, according to the on-board computer.

Also, you may want to pay attention to the kind of article you're critiquing, as well as the date it was written/posted. You are linking to First Looks/First Drives. Meaning, they are the first impressions that their testers have when they receive a vehicle to evaluate.

The Highlander Hybrid review was posted in December 2007 and the Tahoe Hybrid review was posted in June 2008. It's a fair assumption to believe that the Highlander Hybrid review was totally complete and filed six months later, so their fuel economy testing should have been complete (and not just a "so far" or "an estimated" (CR's words from the Highlander Hybrid First Look you linked). In fact, while I am not a subscriber to CR, my buddy is, and I know his username and password, and they list the Highlander Hybrid as getting 24 mpg overall in their testing (18 mpg overall in the non-hybrid). They also say they got 20/28 city/highway in their testing and 26 in a 150-mile trip (versus 13/26 and 22 in the non-hybrid, respectively).

It's not fraud, it was just the timing of the "first looks.":brick