[QUOTE=LilyoftheValley]
Care to tell me why? (Serious question, I want to know why you think Consumer Reports is “biased” about paint.)
BTW: In fairness, I shouldn’t have included nametag’s quote in my post, as he didn’t suggest that he didn’t know about WalMart’s paint department, unlike ZipperJJ.
[/QUOTE]
Well my first reaction to your post was that this was some use of the phrase “number 1” that I was not previously aware.
Why do I have a hard time believing this?
Well the times I have read CR it takes hours to get my eyebrows out of this :dubious: position.
They do not follow scientific procedure, and often compare apple to kumquats. For example back in the early 1970’s I sold tires for Montgomery Ward. I had several customers tell me they would not buy a Ward’s tire as they were rated very poorly by CR. I asked a regular customer if he would bring in the issue. He was right, the top of the line $75.00 Sears radial built by Michelin bet the $18.00 straight bias ply nylon bottom of the line tire, that Wards sold. :rolleyes: No shit? Ya think? I think they just decided that the Sears tire was better and set out to prove their theory. Like we used to say in Chem class, it’s lots easier to draw your curve and plot your data to match.
They often “test” items of opinion or taste. Which peanut butter tastes best was a headline I saw on a CR cover once. I hate to break it to you, but the brand you might dislike, I might like. If I want taste tests, I will read Cook’s. At least they back up their opinion with some rather exhaustive research.
Getting back to your post in particular, I have never seen a big box store paint that could hold a candle to paint from a real live paint store. For a real life example of this, read here.