Are the folks at Consumer Reports a bunch of idiots?

[robby]

@RaftPeople

In my book, Consumer Reports has ZERO credibility.

In the early to mid 90’s we bought a new Dodge Caravan after having read a good review, including quality ratings, etc…

I find this hard to believe for the simple fact that I can’t recall CR recommending ANY domestic vehicles in the 15 years I’ve been a subscriber. Even when they do rate domestic vehicles highly for performance (such as the Jeep Grand Cherokee, for example), they don’t recommend it because of poor reliability.

It’s not just domestic vehicles that receive this treatment. Volkswagen Jettas have been top-rated for performance the last few years, but are not recommended due to poor reliability.

I like to see some evidence for the report that you supposedly relied on to your detriment.

@RaftPeople

…For Consumer Reports to miss or ignore this information basically indicated to me they are either:
Paid by manufacturers to list products and not say too much negative…

Please provide a cite for this libelous assertion. I have found Consumers Union (publisher of Consumer Reports) to be the most honest, above-board consumers’ protection group in the country. They go out of their way to purchase all of the products they test by anonymous buyers, including expensive items like cars and trucks. They do not accept free products for testing, nor do they accept ANY advertising from outside groups whatsoever. It would be quite a scandal to find that they accept any payments from manufacturers, so why don’t you provide some support for this baseless accusation?

@RaftPeople

Unfortunately that was about 4 years too late for a tranmission that was a known problem for 5 years prior to my purchase of the car.

Prove it.

[RaftPeople]

@robby

I find this hard to believe for the simple fact that I can’t recall CR recommending ANY domestic vehicles in the 15 years I’ve been a subscriber. Even when they do rate domestic vehicles highly for performance (such as the Jeep Grand Cherokee, for example), they don’t recommend it because of poor reliability.

It’s not just domestic vehicles that receive this treatment. Volkswagen Jettas have been top-rated for performance the last few years, but are not recommended due to poor reliability.

I like to see some evidence for the report that you supposedly relied on to your detriment.

I don’t have my old copy of CR and I’m not going to purchase a back issue, but are you saying they don’t review and provide results of their investigation of domestic automobiles?

You will just have to trust me that they did indeed have a reliability rating associated with the Dodge Caravan when I looked at the magazine, and the rating was not negative. I even went back to the magazine and double checked before I went to the lemon-law attorney because I couldn’t believe that such a huge problem could get missed.

Please provide a cite for this libelous assertion. I have found Consumers Union (publisher of Consumer Reports) to be the most honest, above-board consumers’ protection group in the country. They go out of their way to purchase all of the products they test by anonymous buyers, including expensive items like cars and trucks. They do not accept free products for testing, nor do they accept ANY advertising from outside groups whatsoever. It would be quite a scandal to find that they accept any payments from manufacturers, so why don’t you provide some support for this baseless accusation?

While I’m sure it was probably a mistake on your part that you only quoted 1/2 of my quote, I’m going to post it here so we both know what I wrote:

@RaftPeople

For Consumer Reports to miss or ignore this information basically indicated to me they are either:
Paid by manufacturers to list products and not say too much negative
or
Not very good at researching and determining quality of products

It’s an opinion arrived at based on my own limited experiences with CR. If you say they don’t accept payment, fine, I trust that. Which means the level of research and quality of information I was expecting was not the same as that which they are attempting to provide to people. Clearly, if there was a problem with the same transmission since 1988 used in various models, I would have expected a red flag, but there was no mention, hence my conclusion.

Prove it.

I’m not going to dig up all of the web-sites I did the first time around with this problem, it’s not that important, but here is one web site:
http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com/

“Since the late 1980’s Chrysler’s front wheel drive A604 Transmission later renamed the 41TE commonly used in its minivans has proven to be a Transmission very likely to fail, however Chrysler continues to use this Transmission design and the almost identical 42LE in many of its newer vehicles. These Transmissions are so problematic and trouble prone, they require a special fluid that has been revised and modified at least 3 times to help keep the Transmissions from destroying themselves. Between 1989 and 1991 Chrysler made 28 different changes in attempt to deal with common problems. Chrysler’s special Mopar ATF has been developed to help smooth out common shift problems and prevent common premature failure. Chrysler’s A606/42LE used in Dodge, Chrysler vehicles such as Intrepid, LHS, Concorde, 300M and Eagle Vision is a nearly identical Transmission, which has also been plagued with the same problems. For years Chrysler has also used these knowingly flawed Transmissions to their advantage, capitalizing on replacement Transmissions, parts, rebuild kits and the required fluid for those that actually know about the special fluid requirements…”

[Frank]

@RaftPeople

I don’t have my old copy of CR and I’m not going to purchase a back issue,

If you can give me an approximate date, I’ll see if it’s in my stack.

My experience was the opposite. Despite all CR’s bad reviews of the build, the electrical system, and the durability of the Saturn L300, I believed the people who said, “Well, CR just doesn’t like Saturn.” I’m regretting that; CR was right on the money.

[RaftPeople]

@Frank

If you can give me an approximate date, I’ll see if it’s in my stack.

My experience was the opposite. Despite all CR’s bad reviews of the build, the electrical system, and the durability of the Saturn L300, I believed the people who said, “Well, CR just doesn’t like Saturn.” I’m regretting that; CR was right on the money.

It was either '93 or '94 (I know that doesn’t narrow it down too much, but hey that was a while ago)

[robby]

@RaftPeople

While I’m sure it was probably a mistake on your part that you only quoted 1/2 of my quote, I’m going to post it here so we both know what I wrote…

No need to do that; your original post is still there for anyone to read.

I didn’t take issue with the second half of your quote, so I didn’t repeat it. You basically stated that the publishers of Consumer Reports are dishonest or incompetent. The latter is a matter of opinion. The former is not. If you don’t have any evidence to support such an accusation, then don’t make it.

@RaftPeople

If you say they don’t accept payment, fine, I trust that. Which means the level of research and quality of information I was expecting was not the same as that which they are attempting to provide to people. Clearly, if there was a problem with the same transmission since 1988 used in various models, I would have expected a red flag, but there was no mention, hence my conclusion.

The earliest auto issue I have is April 1997. The reliability info in that issue was compiled from their 1996 survey. In a section entitled “Highlights of the 1996 Survey,” they state:

@Consumer Reports

Other transmissions likely to be troublesome: those in long-wheelbase Chrysler minivans (Chrysler Town & Country, Dodge Grand Caravan, Plymouth Grand Voyager) and in older short-wheelbase Chrysler minivans. Chrysler redesigned the minivans in 1996, and time will tell how well their transmission will hold up.

In the trouble summaries for the Dodge Caravan V6, every year from 1989 to 1993 was rated as “worse than average.” The '94 and '95 model years were “average,” and the '96 model year was back to “worse than average.” (The 4-cylinder model was generally rated as “average” reliability.)

The Dodge Caravan V6 transmissions were listed as being “worse than average” or “much worse than average” for model years 1989 through 1993.

In summary, you don’t say what what model or year of vehicle that you bought, but my reading seems to show that CR was pretty clear in showing that Dodge Caravans historically had transmission problems.

[Frank]

@RaftPeople

It was either '93 or '94 (I know that doesn’t narrow it down too much, but hey that was a while ago)

robby has me beat. It looks like I subscribed in 2000; I had thought it was earlier.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

I thought I was the only one who did not like CR. I have tried to use it, but as someone else pointed out, the specific models of stuff the review seem to be no longer in the stores by the time I learn about them.

I do sort of like the articles. If I am in the market for (say) a washer, it tells me to look for this, this and that. That helps I think.

Otherwise, it is not too useful.

[DrDeth]

@robby

I find this hard to believe for the simple fact that I can’t recall CR recommending ANY domestic vehicles in the 15 years I’ve been a subscriber. Even when they do rate domestic vehicles highly for performance (such as the Jeep Grand Cherokee, for example), they don’t recommend it because of poor reliability.
.

I have in my hand the 2006 CR “New car ratings & Reviews” special issue. The following domestic cars are “CR Recommended” (which requires at least an average reliability):
Buick la Cross, Buick Rendezvous, Cadillac CTS, Cadillac STS, Chev Avalanche, Chevrolet Impala (which gets a “better than average” relaibility rating, too, which many Toyota’s, etc don’t even get), Chev Malibu Maxx, Chevolet Monte carlo, Chrysler 300, C. Crossfire, C PT Cruiser, Dodge Magnum, Ford Crown Victoria, F 500, F. Focus, F. Mustang, Jeep Liberty, Lincoln Town Car, Mercury Grand Marquis, M. Montego, Pontiac G6, & P. Vibe. And, in the prior year, it was about the same. So, you’re just plain wrong. Many domestic cars are recommended.

I completely beleive both that CR downrated the tranny on the Dodge Caravan, and also Recommended it. CR gets many of it’s ratings from it;s readers after they have owned the car for a while. The Dodge Caravan could well have been Recommended based upon prior perfromance, then downrated in later editions when the tranny problem was found.

There is little doubt that CR is biased in favor of Toyota & Honda. However, I think this is becuase they rank some things very high that those car companies do well, while ignoring stuff that those companies are very bad at. I seriously doubt if there is any colusion going on, however.

There is no doubt that CR USED to run "Rating car dealers’ or “satisfaction with the deal” , where Saturn used to get top ratings and Toyota the worst. Oddly they no longer provide that info. :dubious: I think it is because they are biased by the one company that they do accept advertising from (and a shit-load of it, too)- themselves. They push the CR “New car Price Service” pretty hard.

[RaftPeople]

@robby

No need to do that; your original post is still there for anyone to read.

I didn’t take issue with the second half of your quote, so I didn’t repeat it.

Well, don’t you think dropping 1/2 of a quote, especially when they are connected by an OR is, possibly, just a tiny bit misleading?

You basically stated that the publishers of Consumer Reports are dishonest or incompetent. The latter is a matter of opinion. The former is not. If you don’t have any evidence to support such an accusation, then don’t make it.

Both can be opinions and facts. In this case, it was my OPINION that one of those two statements was true. I even said “it indicated to me.”

Companies that appear to be impartial take money from other companies and promote their products. This happens ALL the time in our economy. It happens in trade journals, it happens with consultants, it happens on TV, on the radio, it’s everywhere.

So I don’t think that’s such a bad thing to consider.

The earliest auto issue I have is April 1997. The reliability info in that issue was compiled from their 1996 survey. In a section entitled “Highlights of the 1996 Survey,” they state:

In the trouble summaries for the Dodge Caravan V6, every year from 1989 to 1993 was rated as “worse than average.” The '94 and '95 model years were “average,” and the '96 model year was back to “worse than average.” (The 4-cylinder model was generally rated as “average” reliability.)

The Dodge Caravan V6 transmissions were listed as being “worse than average” or “much worse than average” for model years 1989 through 1993.

In summary, you don’t say what what model or year of vehicle that you bought, but my reading seems to show that CR was pretty clear in showing that Dodge Caravans historically had transmission problems.

In 1993 I purchased a new 1994 Dodge Caravan (I just looked at my old files).

I don’t think a consumer report issue from 1996 or 1997 is going to help me back in 1993 when I made my purchase. But if your point is that they figured it out eventually, ok fine, that certainly indicates they aren’t completely asleep at the wheel.

[robby]

@DrDeth

I have in my hand the 2006 CR “New car ratings & Reviews” special issue. The following domestic cars are “CR Recommended” (which requires at least an average reliability):
Buick la Cross, Buick Rendezvous, Cadillac CTS, Cadillac STS, Chev Avalanche, Chevrolet Impala (which gets a “better than average” relaibility rating, too, which many Toyota’s, etc don’t even get), Chev Malibu Maxx, Chevolet Monte carlo, Chrysler 300, C. Crossfire, C PT Cruiser, Dodge Magnum, Ford Crown Victoria, F 500, F. Focus, F. Mustang, Jeep Liberty, Lincoln Town Car, Mercury Grand Marquis, M. Montego, Pontiac G6, & P. Vibe. And, in the prior year, it was about the same. So, you’re just plain wrong. Many domestic cars are recommended.

You are correct. I shouldn’t have said that. Upon reviewing some of their auto issues last night, they do indeed recommend vehicles that score well on performance and at least “average” in reliability. Many domestic vehicles fall into this category.

@RaftPeople

Well, don’t you think dropping 1/2 of a quote, especially when they are connected by an OR is, possibly, just a tiny bit misleading?

Both can be opinions and facts. In this case, it was my OPINION that one of those two statements was true. I even said “it indicated to me.”

Companies that appear to be impartial take money from other companies and promote their products. This happens ALL the time in our economy. It happens in trade journals, it happens with consultants, it happens on TV, on the radio, it’s everywhere.

But CR makes a huge point in their publication that they NEVER accept money or free products from companies. And to surmise that they do (even with a alternative supposition that they are just incompetent) with no evidence is scurrilous. They either accept money and products or they do not. It’s not a matter of opinion.

@RaftPeople

In 1993 I purchased a new 1994 Dodge Caravan (I just looked at my old files).

I don’t think a consumer report issue from 1996 or 1997 is going to help me back in 1993 when I made my purchase. But if your point is that they figured it out eventually, ok fine, that certainly indicates they aren’t completely asleep at the wheel.

I’d be curious to see what they did say back in 1993, but I don’t have issues that go back that far.

[RaftPeople]

@robby

But CR makes a huge point in their publication that they NEVER accept money or free products from companies. And to surmise that they do (even with a alternative supposition that they are just incompetent) with no evidence is scurrilous. They either accept money and products or they do not. It’s not a matter of opinion.

Robby, if you read a review that basically indicated the car had decent reliability (I don’t remember the exact rating, other than it was not negative, that’s all I cared about), and then you had problems and then found out that since 1988 Chrysler had been having huge problems with their transmissions and that there were class action lawsuits, Ralph Nader, consumer groups and the federal government pressuring Chrysler to fix the prioblem, what exactly would you conclude?

What are all of the reasonable explanations that you would entertain that could explain why CR didn’t say “Warning: Chrysler has had significant transmission problems in every model of car that uses the XXXX tranmission, which is the transmission found in this Dodge Caravan”?

[robby]

@RaftPeople

Robby, if you read a review that basically indicated the car had decent reliability (I don’t remember the exact rating, other than it was not negative, that’s all I cared about), and then you had problems and then found out that since 1988 Chrysler had been having huge problems with their transmissions and that there were class action lawsuits, Ralph Nader, consumer groups and the federal government pressuring Chrysler to fix the prioblem, what exactly would you conclude?

What are all of the reasonable explanations that you would entertain that could explain why CR didn’t say “Warning: Chrysler has had significant transmission problems in every model of car that uses the XXXX tranmission, which is the transmission found in this Dodge Caravan”?

I suspect they did indicate something to that effect in the issue you read. In any event, “not negative” is not exactly a glowing recommendation. I personally wouldn’t purchase a vehicle with just “average” reliability, anyway. “Average” is not all that great, IMHO.

Also, CR generally doesn’t try to predict the future. They either indicate the “projected reliability” or, for new models, state that there is “insufficient data.” Even if a model has historically had problems, they have no way of knowing if the manufacturer has been able to correct them.

However, they do give reliability ratings and historical trouble spots for older vehicles. And as I stated previously:

@robby

…In the trouble summaries for the Dodge Caravan V6, every year from 1989 (emphasis added) to 1993 was rated as “worse than average.”

…The Dodge Caravan V6 transmissions were listed as being “worse than average” or “much worse than average” for model years 1989 (emphasis added) through 1993.

Consumer Reports covers back 8 model years. In the 1997 issue I quoted above, they reported historical problems with Dodge Caravan transmissions as far back as their reported data (1989). Your 1993 issue would have covered historical problems back to 1985. I’d be surprised if the trouble with Dodge Caravan transmissions appeared out of nowhere in the 1997 issue.

Besides just reading their report on the latest model Dodge Caravan in your 1993 issue, did you look at the historical reliability ratings?

[Stan_Shmenge]

@t-bonham@scc.net

Especially in electronics & technical products, the big chain stores like Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. order their own models from the manufacturers, with their own model numbers on them. Often just one of the manufacturers standard models, but with a few slight cosmetic changes, but a different model number. And their contract specifies that they can’t sell to anyone else with that model number.

This is specifically done to prevent consumers from doing comparisons – they can’t go across the street to the competitor and compare prices on the same item. And their models are not the same model number as those tested by CR, so their sales clerks can argue that the problems reported in CR don’t apply to this model.

There have also been cases where manufacturers have taken advantage of this, too. If a model is given a very bad rating, they may change the model number on all the new ones coming out of the factory, to try to escape that bad rating.

And if a model gets a good rating, manufacturers will continue using that same model number on a new, cheaper version of the product.

**Not one word of this is true. **Maybe you are thinking of mattresses. Some stores have “House brands”, but this is not so common any more. Retailers have discovered people like brand names. In all cases of shopping for electronic goods in recent years, I have found the identical products at all the retailers I checked. This applies to laptop computers, desktops, televisions, stereo gear, car audio, cameras, washers, etc. While it is true not all stores may stock all models from a given manufacturer, they are standard models that any store can order, should they care to stock them.

/comparison shops for all kinds of things
//I am a one-man “Consumer Reports”
///Want a good digital camera? I just bought the Canon A700, and it is one of the best all in one digital cameras you can get. Canon. 6Mp, 6X optical zoom. 'Nuff said.
////CR can suck it

[Stan_Shmenge]

@robby

I’d be curious to see what they did say back in 1993, but I don’t have issues that go back that far.

I have the complete run from issue 1 to around the year 2000 (Late father was a completist) so if anyone actually cares, I could dig it out and settle it once and for all. Usually though, they don’t offer reliability advice on new models, and the Crapavan is the kind of car they would tend to recommend, so maybe this is what the poster is recalling.

Consumer reports:

“Nice minivan. It was easy to get in the seat. Short drivers could see out the mirror, blah blah blah. Can’t say much about reliability, new model”

Poster remembers CR saying:

“If you buy this minvan, life will be perfect forever”
I don’t like CR because for appliances they are wrong, I bought a Neptune washer on their say so, and the thing doesn’t rinse the soap out of the clothes. Damn expensive too. For cheap stuff who cares, I can decide if I don’t like a brand of peanut butter. Good for the auto data though. You just have to know how to read it.