[PMC the 1st]

(PLEASE NOTE: IN THIS THREAD, ALL IMPORT CARS ARE LISTED IN BOLDFACE PRINT AND ALL DOMESTICS IN REGULAR PRINT)
In this Month's issue, Consumer Reports has the Mazda6 listed ahead of both the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan (all three get a score of 69, but the Mazda is on top), yet the Mazda not only has worse reliability than the Ford (Average versus Excellent, respectively), but also costs nearly $2,000 more ($22,000 versus $21,300). Why is the Mazda higher on the list than the Ford?
Also, in the same issue, the Kia Amanti is listed by Consumer Reports as a great value because there are now rebates on this $30,000 car, but Consumer Reports did not mention anything about the inevitable, substantial rebates on the Buick Lucerne when they tested the car back in Mar 2007. Is there a reason? They are both in the same class and they both have the same rebates.
Furthermore, Consumer Reports claims they do not take the reliability of a car into account when they do their "expert" road tests. If that's the case, then is there a reason why they dropped the Toyota Camry from 'Excellent' to 'Very Good'? They did this downgrade shortly after Camry owners reported 'Below Average' reliability on the car.

Consumer Reports claims they are not biased towards a product, whether it's an import or a domestic. They also claim that they do not take reliability data into account when evaluating their cars. I'm presenting this thread to determine if I'm going nuts or if there is indeed a compromise in their "unbiased" ratings.

More discrepancies with this company will be presented by me and perhaps others on an ongoing basis...

 

[2648562]

I was online the other day and they have a big article about how great the CTS is and how much better it is than the BMW and Mercedes they compated it to. But then they go and recommend the BMW and Mercedes and not the Cadillac. I was almost shocked!

 

[PMC the 1st]

I was online the other day and they have a big article about how great the CTS is and how much better it is than the BMW and Mercedes they compated it to. But then they go and recommend the BMW and Mercedes and not the Cadillac. I was almost shocked!

Yep! It gets even worse.
According to Consumer Reports, the import Honda S2000 gets a thrifty 25/30 MPG with a 25 MPG average and the domestic Pontiac Solstice gets 23 MPG mixed.
Yet the EPA got 18/24 MPG for the import with mixed driving at 20 MPG, and 17/26 for the domestic with mixed driving at a higher 21 MPG.
Source: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/18314.shtml

Can someone please explain why Consumer Reports blatantly lied about the import's MPG figure, yet was honest about the domestic's MPG figure?

 

[FenwickHockey65]

We all know that CR is biased in every way. I don't know about Mazda, they're pretty much Ford.

 

[mbukukanyau]

this guys makes news up, He needs to identify his sources with links

 

[PMC the 1st]

this guys makes news up, He needs to identify his sources with links

Gentlemen, look at my second post, where I edited the post to add my source. As you can see, the time stamp on the edit is 9:24.
The time stamp on this guy's post is 9:27. He's a little late. Or a little slow,as the case may be.

 

[Smaart Aas Saabr]

Yep! It gets even worse.
According to Consumer Reports, the import Honda S2000 gets a thrifty 25/30 MPG with a 25 MPG average and the domestic Pontiac Solstice gets 23 MPG mixed.
Yet the EPA got 18/24 MPG for the import with mixed driving at 20 MPG, and 17/26 for the domestic with mixed driving at a higher 21 MPG.
Source: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/18314.shtml

Can someone please explain why Consumer Reports blatantly lied about the import's MPG figure, yet was honest about the domestic's MPG figure?

CR may be using their own fuel-economy test cycle which would clearly explain the difference. Considering they got 25 MPG on one and 23 on another this is within expectation... if they got 40 MPG on the Honda and 10 on the Pontiac then you would have a case...

 

[PMC the 1st]

CR may be using their own fuel-economy test cycle which would clearly explain the difference. Considering they got 25 MPG on one and 23 on another this is within expectation... if they got 40 MPG on the Honda and 10 on the Pontiac then you would have a case...

Dude. MPG bias at Consumer Reports is rampant, where Consumer Reports consistently commits fraud by upping the Japanese import MPG relative to the domestic MPG. This happens 60% of the time. How often does Consumer Reports reflect a higher-than-EPA rating for the domestic relative to a Japanese import in the same class? 0% of the time.

 

[PMC the 1st]

To further elaborate import fraud at Consumer Reports:
Consumer Reports tests the Toyota Highlander and Buick Enclave in January. Here are the highlights :

The Toyota Highlander had the following faults:

Poor, artificial steering feel
Sloppy avoidance maneuver
(very) cramped 3rd-row seating
Panel gaps and spotty assembly
Elevated levels of road noise
Consumer Reports MPG for the import car: 13/26 with 18 MPG combined.
EPA MPG for the import: 17/23 with 19 MPG combined.

What Consumer Reports said about the Enclave:
Handling is more responsive than even some sedans
Quick steering with decent response
Avoidance maneuver is secure and predictable
Enclave's 3rd-row seat is as roomy as on some minivans
The Enclave had the following faults, which reads more like acts of desparation on Consumer Report's part:
Transmission is reluctant to downshift. (Their excuse is that they were testing an Enclave with old transmission computer software. Why, I wonder, did they test a model with old software when new software was avaliable?)
Transmission improved after installing updated computer software
"Flash-to-Pass" feature a "serious omission"
Consumer Reports MPG for the domestic nameplate: 10/24, with 15 MPG combined.
EPA's MPG for the domestic? 16/24, with a combined of 19 MPG.

Once again, we return to Consumer Reports MPG bias, as they did with the Honda S2000. Consumer Reports rates the import unusually high, nearly meeting the EPA in "combined MPG" at 18 and exceeding the highway estimate.
Consumer Reports again rates the domestic unfairly low, with a ghastly 10 MPG city and an equally pathetic 15 MPG combined, while the EPA gives the domestic 16 MPG city and a whopping 19 MPG combined!
Why do we have a much lower "combined" and a breakeven "highway" for the domestic, yet a much higher "combined" and a much higher "highway" MPG for the import?

What's even more mind-boggling is they rate the import Toyota first-place, with 81 points!
Where does the domestic Enclave sit? A far lower 6th place.

 

[marinerbc]

Dude. MPG bias at Consumer Reports is rampant, where Consumer Reports consistently commits fraud by upping the Japanese import MPG relative to the domestic MPG. This happens 60% of the time. How often does Consumer Reports reflect a higher-than-EPA rating for the domestic relative to a Japanese import in the same class? 0% of the time.

I think you may be preaching to the choir here, PMC. We're all pretty convinced that a reader driven survey a la CR that doesn't have many GM participants doesn't well represent the GM product.

There isn't much one can do about it, except disregard CR. Been there, done that.

 

[FenwickHockey65]

^^ Basically. Just ignore them. They've been biased for as long as anyone can remember, it's just that there are some idiots out there that believe every word they say.

 

[Mr. Burns]

Shouldn't you be telling this to people on import forums?

 

[PMC the 1st]

Shouldn't you be telling this to people on import forums?

I did. That's how I got banned from Car and Driver the fifth time.

 

[BrickTamland]

but also costs nearly $2,000 more ($22,000 versus $21,300).

Check your math.

 

[FenwickHockey65]

I did. That's how I got banned from Car and Driver the fifth time.

He means the fanboys over at toyotanation.com. There's a link to them at the bottom of the page.

 

[ciciusss]

Certainly there is room to criticize Consumer Reports. But, to be fair, the Mazda 6 (both 4 and 6 cylinders tested) scored a 69. The 4 cylinder Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan scored a 69 in CR's testing, but the 6 cylinder Fusion and Milan scored a 77.

Currently there are no Mercedes Benz's that are recommended because of below average reliability or they are to new to have any reliability results. The 1st generation CTS has been recommended over the past couple of years because it met all of CR's requirements for recommendation, which are it scored well enough in their road testing, had at least average reliability in their survey and had good crash test scores. The reason the new CTS has not been recommended is that there are no reliability results.

Consumer Reports does their own fuel economy tests. The test is run the same for each car with two drivers. If there is more than a slight difference between the two drivers mpg, the test is run again. Cold weather is taken into account since vehicles typically have worst fuel economy than in mild weather. That is why you see a difference in their fuel economy figures versus the EPAs.

Where there is valid criticism is on the methodology that is used on their surveys. Also, CR will not acknowledge that the differences in most vehicles reliability (particularly new vehicles) is much less than generally supposed.

As for their testing, the biggest criticism is that no one knows how they get their final test scores. There are 50 categories that are scored, but CR does not release how much weight a particular category receives when tallying these scores.

Also, vehicles that are built for offroading, such as the H3, Wrangler or FJ Cruiser are penalized because, although offroad ability is tested, the offroad tests do not figure into the final score. This is somewhat unfair, because vehicles geared for offroading make compromises in categories (such as ride) which are scored.

 

[PMC the 1st]

I think you may be preaching to the choir here, PMC. We're all pretty convinced that a reader driven survey a la CR that doesn't have many GM participants doesn't well represent the GM product.

There isn't much one can do about it, except disregard CR. Been there, done that.

It's interesting to note that I'm "preaching to the choir" as far as bias at C/R is concerned, yet my infinite wisdom regarding Car and Driver went on largely ignored.

The important thing to understand regarding Consumer Reports is, with the introduction of this thread, you now have proof of fraud at C/R. I mean, bordering on the illegal. Corporate defamation, and so fourth.

 

[PMC the 1st]

He means the fanboys over at toyotanation.com. There's a link to them at the bottom of the page.

Thanks. I'll try! :yup:

 

[plane]

I did. That's how I got banned from Car and Driver the fifth time.

Welcome to GMI.
In the future,
please do not try to confuse us with the facts.

It's just easier if we all go along like sheeple with the pablum served up by CR and their anything but GM uberbias.

(And no, one or two exceptions does not a rule break. That dishonest rejoinder can be seen miles away.)

 

[TheGeneral]

The mazda6 came out in the 2003MY so I'm sure the fusion is better.