[goochman]

I'm curious what year models these cars are that have window motor problems. My 84 GMC had 210K and was 15 years old when i sold it and never had a problem. My 94 Chevy K1500 has 249k and hasn't had problems either.

My '91 and '99 Grand Prix's had the driver winder motor go around 70K - $200 repair. My Tahoe has 105K miles and the driver window is starting to move slower, I would guess I might get another year or so out of it - but by then I will have 6 years and ~125K miles so I wouldnt mind so much.

 

[ALMSfan]

CR is selling their 'opinion of the best car in their minds' - not a reliability study like in the past. Sure its part of the equation, but ultimately the most reliable car in the world would not get a recommended rating if it didnt pass their other subjective criteria (which may or may not be important to you the consumer).

Subjective criteria like poor handling, bad visibility, poor ride, and other bad test results in their tested Yaris and FJ Cruiser, two reliable vehicles that CR doesn't recommend?

Or is it only bad when a GM vehicle that is reliable gets a bad test score from Consumers Reports and can't be recommended?

Just checking...

 

[ponchoman49]

The fit and finish of American cars is better but lapses still rear there ugly heads every now and then. The Aura's interior comes to mind, my buddys 2006 Impala which neither GM or the garage can figure out why the tire pressure lights keeps coming on with tires that are properly inflated or a keyless entry system that only works when your 10' away from the car. A family friend just bought a 2006 Sebring convertible and it's been in the shop about 6 times already for various electrical issues, wheel bearings, a no start condition etc. I would also be wary of certain GM models like the G-body Lucerne, W-body LaCrosse/Grand Prix etc for intermediate steering shaft issues and the weak 4T65 tranny, blower motors and wheel bearings, things that plagued these cars for the past 10 years or so.

 

[goblue]

CR did not and has not.

It's one thing for you to not like CR or JD Power, or Karesh and criticize them. It's another to just type out and out inaccuracies to make your case. And trying to say that A) CR merges data to make scores look bad and B) that they lump satisfaction into their reliability data are BOTH falacies.

Unless, of course, you work there and know for sure. Just publish your data and facts to back up the statements.

This isn't a scored debate, and I'm not going to waste valuable time scouring the internet for articles. I post what I remember reading, If I remembered it wrong, my apologies - I don't have time to do intricate searches. You completely misread what I was saying. CR never merged data to make scores look bad - but for a time they merged data to cover up the unexplainable differences in reliability between identical cars wearing different badges. They may have reverted - I haven't checked. I took a few minutes on google looking for the articles from years ago, didn't find them. Maybe you will. I remember the debate clearly from years ago. I have never talked about satisfaction at all in any of these posts - thats CR's rankings, of course they are inherently biased, they are the opinions of the editors.

Alas, what I did find is the Equinox is not recommended for reliability but the Torrent is. Anyone care to take a shot at what that means?

EDIT - Found one: Here's some quotes from an article on this

"Different drivetrains have different reliabilities -- CR often lumps them all together. (Now they are also combining "corporate twins" to hide the anomalies of years past)"

"Note that CR has in recent years lumped together siblings sold under different labels to give the appearance of validity"

"I've noticed a number of occasions where data they have presented simply CANNOT be correct. Example 1 - a few years ago I looked at their reliability chart for the [car and car with another engine]. They claim that exterior fit and finish was [good rating] on the [one engine] and [terrible rating] for the [other engine] . This translates to a 4 and a 1 on a 1 to 5 scale. Since these vehicles were produced by the same workers, tools, raw materials, etc it is not possible for this to happen! I could buy a difference of one but not three between the two. A short statistical analysis lesson would be appropriate here. You can expect a variation of one when working with something like this. If you see the deviation that you do here you simply have not sampled the data properly! This is basic statistics. If this difference came in something that was not common to the two, like the engine, cooling system, transmission, etc. I would be able to accept the variation as correct. However, there is no way that this deviation from one to the next can occur with common items to the two.

Example 2 - [same cars, different nameplates]. There were major differences with the engine, electrical, fit and finish, etc. between these two. The only difference between them was the name plate applied near the end of the assembly line and a code in the VIN. There were differences in standard levels of equipment, but, that should not statistically effect what CR would have us believe it did. This is another case of improper statistical procedures."

http://www.allpar.com/cr.html

Years ago, that site used to have the specific models - which ones were merged, examples by year, and explanations - but thanks to CR's legal department they can no longer list the specifics as it could be copyright infringement.

 

[asim]

This is definitely a good article to read, I always find articles of this nature to be very interesting and insightful into the depths of the auto industry. I think GM needs to get everyone in the company and everyone outside the company working for suppliers to be on the same page about their goal of quality. It just isn't fit and finish, there is A LOT more than that.

 

[2648562]

Stepping it up in their minds is cutting costs and reacting to the competiotion.

 

[GM-Joe]

My '91 and '99 Grand Prix's had the driver winder motor go around 70K - $200 repair. My Tahoe has 105K miles and the driver window is starting to move slower, I would guess I might get another year or so out of it - but by then I will have 6 years and ~125K miles so I wouldnt mind so much.

My Dad's 2000 Sierra had a problem with the pulley mechanism on the passenger side; obviously the same damn problem for everyone.

 

[Old Dood]

My Park Avenue "Clacks" when it goes all the way down and rests in the open position. It is also real slow in the colder months. I have tried lubrication it and it still is slow. Probably a minimum of $200.00 to fix...<sigh>

My LeSabre did the same exact thing too.

 

[ALMSfan]

http://www.allpar.com/cr.html

.

allpar.com?

wait a sec...I've just gotta go find the primary-source website that proves that we didn't land on the moon. And that Elvis is alive and hanging out with JFK.

It's on the web...GOTTA be true.

Torrent and Equinox...well, CR says their differing data may be because one was introduced a year later. What is the GM fanboy-type argument going to be this time? That Chevy buyers are biased against GM products more than Pontiac buyers are? I mean, it's the argument used for the Vibe/Matrix complaint (nevermind they are built in two different locations), so it probably is valid here.

The bias/conspiracy arguments are comical.

And for someone who seems to speak authoritatively on CR, you don't really know their testing/reporting process. Read up on them ...Business Week, Boston Globe, etc have done big spreads over the past few years explaining their testing and reporting process. If you think it's just like some website or small-time rag, where they get a test car for a week (or drive a dealer's car -- like the Truth About Cars "testing") then you are sorely mistaken.

 

[ALMSfan]

You completely misread what I was saying. CR never merged data to make scores look bad - but for a time they merged data to cover up the unexplainable differences in reliability between identical cars wearing different badges. They may have reverted - I haven't checked. I took a few minutes on google looking for the articles from years ago, didn't find them. Maybe you will. I remember the debate clearly from years ago. I have never talked about satisfaction at all in any of these posts - thats CR's rankings, of course they are inherently biased, they are the opinions of the editors.

Yes, they way I read it made it seem you were talking about satisfaction and reliability being merged...you were talking about vibe/matrix being merged. My apologies.

However, you're also going purely by the print product, which is most-likely constrained by page count if/when it is done. On their website CR breaks out each model for reliability. Unlimited space, etc, etc.

I have my copy of their April issue, the car issue, and the Accord 4 and 6 are broken out, the camry 4 and 6 (pre- and post redesign) are broken out, the Vibe and Matrix are broken out, the Torrent and Equinox are broken out, Subaru Legacy turbo and non-turbo are broken out, etc, etc.

BUT, they seem to have fewer years of data printed, but more charts compared with prior years. So it looks like they possibly trimmed data back in order to include more models?

 

[GMGMGM]

It is unrealistic that a Cobalt should be able to compete with a Civic, yet it does, to a certain extent. ...Yet, my guess is that the Cobalt maybe GM of North American first world class quality compact car.

I would agree on quality.
Yet, I would like to point out that the main reason Cobalt would remain rather incompetitive is its internal space.
Two of my colleagues argumented their decision bying Civic for it looked most spacious in its class (Honda quality was just a bonus!)
Now look, Cobalt's front and rear leg room space combined is LESS than in Aveo or Honda Fit despite the drastic difference in exterior.
(Data are taken directly from GMCanada on-line comparison tool)

So the Cobalt makes possibly a decent car for two, but for small families (at least in Canada many people choose compact cars for...) it is not much of a choice.

Ironically, Malibu would be the closest Civic, Corolla, Versa, etc competitor in terms of internal space...

------------------------------Front legroom ----Rear legroom---- Exterior
2007 Chevrolet Cobalt Sedan ____1,063 mm ________853 mm ______4,580 mm
2007 Chevrolet Aveo LT ________1,048 mm ________ 898 mm ______4,310 mm
2007 Honda Fit DX _____________1,064 mm ________856 mm ______3,999 mm
2007 Nissan Versa Hatchback ____1,052 mm ________966 mm ______4,295 mm

 

[boydrive]

My 2001 Aurora's rear window just fell in it's tracks one day

I guess Honda uses the same company because the 2004 Acura TL I had had the same problem at 20,000 miles among various other problems. Happy to be driving a 2005 STS V8 NAV with 58,000 trouble free miles. The car you all knock that I get many complaments about!!!

 

[goochman]

Subjective criteria like poor handling, bad visibility, poor ride, and other bad test results in their tested Yaris and FJ Cruiser, two reliable vehicles that CR doesn't recommend?

Or is it only bad when a GM vehicle that is reliable gets a bad test score from Consumers Reports and can't be recommended?

Just checking...

Lol, someone got up on the wrong side of the bed - notice I didnt mention *any* brands, however now that you mention it - who rates bad handling? Buicks are very 'soft' riding and considered 'bad handling' - again, some folks would find this a plus. I would imagine 'material touch and feel' is also part of their 'criteria'.

Since CR doesnt disclose all their 'hidden' criteria how do you know exactly what they are using to hold back a recommendation?

Just pointing out that CR is not a reliability study anymore since most can agree that you are splitting hairs in this arena.

As for your points above, thankfully there are folks who use their own judgement and have bought many FJ's and Yaris's and realized that what CR doesnt like has no impact on their tastes.

 

[CobaltSScrazy]

GM parts quality sucks.

Their assembly plant quality control may be amazing, but it doesn't stop bad parts from getting into their cars.

Quality control has to be total and complete...not easy, but it's necessary.


On a side note...I picked up a Consumer's Reports yesterday. I was impressed that the Tahoe, Suburban, and Yukon got above average in their first year. The Ford Fusion got a perfect rating.
That's pretty impressive considering how much CR hates American cars. GM needs to do everything possible to look good in that magazine.

idk where the **** you are getting where their part quality sucks from...my family works for GM and I can attest that at least powertrain quality (obviously as evidenced by the warranty) is NOT sacrificed AT ALL in the least! I can't comment on interior materials, etc. but powertrain wise that is COMPLETELY INCORRECT...

but...I agree with you on the part i bolded. and that goes for across the product line, NOT just for the GMT900's, Sigma vehicles, and a few others.

CobaltSScrazy

 

[geozinger]

allpar.com?

wait a sec...I've just gotta go find the primary-source website that proves that we didn't land on the moon. And that Elvis is alive and hanging out with JFK.

It's on the web...GOTTA be true.

Torrent and Equinox...well, CR says their differing data may be because one was introduced a year later. What is the GM fanboy-type argument going to be this time? That Chevy buyers are biased against GM products more than Pontiac buyers are? I mean, it's the argument used for the Vibe/Matrix complaint (nevermind they are built in two different locations), so it probably is valid here.

The bias/conspiracy arguments are comical.

And for someone who seems to speak authoritatively on CR, you don't really know their testing/reporting process. Read up on them ...Business Week, Boston Globe, etc have done big spreads over the past few years explaining their testing and reporting process. If you think it's just like some website or small-time rag, where they get a test car for a week (or drive a dealer's car -- like the Truth About Cars "testing") then you are sorely mistaken.

David Zatz, (the person who publishes allpar.com) is a PhD. in Psychology. He's been hosting his site for years and is respectable. He has a consulting business, in which he lists his qualifications (http://www.toolpack.com/bios.html). I don't know the guy personally,but I have used his EDIT: (allpar) site as a reference over the years and found it to be trustworthy. On the allpar site he explains his doubts about the methodology CR uses. (http://www.allpar.com/cr.html). I think he's pretty detailed and upfront about his concerns.

 

[vcs2600]

On the allpar site he explains his doubts about the methodology CR uses. (http://www.allpar.com/cr.html). I think he's pretty detailed and upfront about his concerns.

I don't think anyone can defend CR's mystery methodology as statistically valid (which is not to say that its totally invalid either).

But this page is all third hand information such as "Jimbo wrote in to say CR once said something about make #1 vs make #2". No actual names, dates, issue numbers and so on. Seems to me that since every public library has a pile of Consumer Report issues, a proper critisim of their results should include actual references to these events.

 

[Bravada]

Just a sidenote: Dave Zatz has an (not so hidden but rather evident) agenda which determines the content of his site. You need about two or three minutes there to know it and to know what most articles there will contain (apart from a host of interesting facts in history articles). I mean, this guy and his folks would push their agenda so far that they'd even exclaim how wonderful the new Sebring or Caliber are! With regard to that, even the die-hard GM fans here can come accross as balanced and impartial.

 

[bluecon]

Alas, what I did find is the Equinox is not recommended for reliability but the Torrent is. Anyone care to take a shot at what that means?

The Equinox and Torrent are not the same mechanically. Different suspension parts and steering. And I would guess a different interior.

 

[jvanleuvan]

A car is the sum of its parts.

I remember reading an interview with some industry insider. (this was a while ago)

basically he said that many times the domestics will have a "better" design for a system that the imports. But thier cost cutting on the parts they use for that system will lead to poor reliability.

The car really is the sum of it's parts. And when you have such a huge price dis-advantage ($2500+) you have to skimp somewhere.

for example- I just built a motor for my 95 camaro. I bought some roller rockers made by pro-form (in China) they were very inexpensive. However, about 2000 miles a bearing went out in one. Replaced it for $25, then a week later one of the poly-locks just failed and I lost the rocker & pushrod.

Point is. The motor I built would be considered "poor" quility. But I will attest I built it with the up-most care. It only takes one chap part to fail to make the whole look bad.

 

[goblue]

David Zatz, (the person who publishes allpar.com) is a PhD. in Psychology. He's been hosting his site for years and is respectable. He has a consulting business, in which he lists his qualifications (http://www.toolpack.com/bios.html). I don't know the guy personally,but I have used his EDIT: (allpar) site as a reference over the years and found it to be trustworthy. On the allpar site he explains his doubts about the methodology CR uses. (http://www.allpar.com/cr.html). I think he's pretty detailed and upfront about his concerns.

Exactly. I linked his site to show that CR has been changing how they group vehicles in response to statistical improbabilities.