Getting into the CR debate late, but they do use the scientific methods of observation and reader’s input. They than publish results and conclusions based upon those practices as likelihoods only. Unlike the rest of the automotive world, including JD Power ( what a joke we even quote them), advertising money does not taint the results.
And it’s CR among others and a few precious govt. regs. that have made cars safer, not the car maker’s benevolence.
Let’s let the “dummies” of independent tester die instead, realizing that if the throttle problem had shown up in CR’s test and surveys, they would have reported it in print and in the news immediately. JD would have waited to have it cleared by whomever financed the survey…
Good post, Dagosa. CR’s independence often hits people over the head with its harsh criticism. The disqualification of a number of cars over the years due to a defect that would make it a potentially dangerous vehicle shows they do not pull any punches.
For a number of years they would not recommend the Hyundai Elantra, an otherwise excellent car, becuase it did not fare well in a head on collision. If anything they are too conservative, but they have to assume every product has to be idiot-proof since many “idiots” will be using it.
So CR did not uncover any sticky gas pedals becaue they buy new cars with their own money and the defect would only show up after some wear occurs.
Like you, I take JD Powers rating with a grain of salt. Manufacturers pay $5000+ per model for this work and the company can’t condemn any cars for “business” reasons.
Upstart TrueDelta, which I participate in, shows results similar to CR, but does nor go into detail about problems.
CR does some things well and some things poorly. You outlined the good things. One problem is that they are too conservative. They lump all cars into the worst category that have more than 3% reported problems. They don’t go into cost, so the rating is very much like JD Power in that respect. Breaking the problems into major subsystems is good, though. Another problem is that they only survey subscribers. This skews the ratings. It is reasonable to assume that subscribers use the test data and buy what CR recommends. That would make Toyota, for instance, look a lot better than a car that was not recommended because there is likely not much data on the car they don’t recommend. The effect would be to lag behind meaningful changes in other cars. MSN Autos and Edmunds use Intellifix. As you may know, Intellifix surveys repair shops for data and sells the data back to them. It helps figure out what the most likely cause of a failure is and how to repair it. I use CR data, but I never use it alone. I’ve found it to be misleading, especially for used cars, where the premium for Toyota and Honda is rarely justified in repair savings.
Agree jt; no organization does everything well. I have subcribed to CR since 1968, and have also used non-American sources such as the Automotive Protections Association from Canada and “Which” from the UK. The magazine AUTO TEST from Holland (unfortunately only in Dutch) is very good too.
For consumer goods I’ve used CR to buy appliances, computers, cameras, TVs, etc. All have lasted much longer than our friends’ units and have ben less troublesome.
The Canadian AAA branch used to tally annual repair costs for each make in their surveys, a very handy feature. Those figures (actual by owners) differed dramatically from the Edmunds figure, by the way.
On CR surveys I pay attention to the major black balls, if they affect critical and exspensive items, like the Camry transmissions, I stay away. I disregard CR downrating a car due to perceived lower relative safety features.
However, you need the feedback from owners and mechanics as to what cars are good as well. My mechanic keeps asking when I want to sell him our 1994 Nissan Sentra with 125,000 miles on it.
Simply put…CR is a consumer advocate publication financed primarily by it’s constituents and not stock holders. The consumer whose trust they are dependent upon.
Straight from the horses mouth JD Power is financed by the businesses it represents in the surveys…
please read from “their” web site.
[b]Each year, J.D. Power and Associates surveys millions of consumers around the world to gather their opinions and expectations about a wide variety of products and services. Since 1968, the company has been providing automotive manufacturers and suppliers with consumer-based research to help them improve their performance. J.D. Power associates worldwide provide a variety of research, consulting, and forecasting services designed to help the company?s clients:
J.D. Power and Associates is a global marketing information services firm founded in 1968 by James David Power III. The firm conducts surveys of customer satisfaction, product quality, and buyer behavior for industries[/b]
They are a corporation…whose work is designed to “help their clients” who are not consumers but other corps. A big distinction.
CR is non profit. JD power is for profit.
Most people “blink” when someone tries to show this distinction and how important it is in trusting and presenting their findings. This meansThey are paid by the corps they serve who use their results for advertisement purposes.
This means corp. have editing rights over findings involving their products.
Also, please note that JD power is continually quoted in car advertisements while Consumer Reports prohibits it. That tells you explicitly who’s getting paid for what and who has editing rights over what ever JD Power states.
Could do more for GM/Ford(not)/Chrysler than any government bailout…could this mean we may actually get some of our money back when people flock to the big three ? I’m holding my breath !
CR is a profit making organization. They make enough to pay the people who work there, and the employees are a very real constituency for them. I don’t think that they are dishonest, but I do believe that they present data in a way that maximizes the differences and this leads to more magazine sales. It is useful data for cars, but not by itself. It’s important to me to know what the estimated average difference in cost of repairs is so that I can assess the difference in price for the car. This is especially true for used cars, where Toyota or Honda have excellent resale value. But that value might not reflect actual differences in repair costs. I use CR almost exclusively for items like vacuum cleaners that are inexpensive enough that I will replace it if it breaks.
BTW, Toyota advertises in JD Power. Should I ignore their information because of that?
Also, I received a questionnaire from JD Power after I bought a 2009 Chevy Cobalt. The questionnaire did not come from GM.
Now they are talking about sending repair kits out to the owners! D.I.Y. Translation: It will take the dealers YEARS to repair all the effected cars on the road!
Ford did not ask for nor did they receive any bail-out money…
The repair takes 1 hour and if 3000 dealers assign 5 techs to the job they can do the whole 3 million cars in …5 weeks. That’s if the dealers do all the work. With D I Ys and independent mechanics the job will go a lot faster. These from the president of Toyota who was on TV today, and said kits were being shipped this week.
Your “YEARS” may be correct since there will always be some owners who will do nothing for several years, and then cry wolf.
Also, I received a questionnaire from JD Power after I bought a 2009 Chevy Cobalt. The questionnaire did not come from GM.
It was payed in part for by the clients of JD Power which includes GM. jt…are you “blinking” ? Do you you see no distinction between not for profit and those who do the survey for their paying clients who have editing rights on the use of that information. No one “says” they are dishonest, but we should always reserve the right…They are a corp for profit and being “dishonest and exhibiting sociopathic behavior” is built in to any “for profit” corporation. And who said that Toyota was being totally honest ?
Check other forums and you will hear the same quibble. Members of car forums who don’t trust CR on cars, members of AV forums who don’t trust CR on AV equipment, incl TVs etc. Everyone has their own rational regarding the products they buy.
It’s amazing how people actually believe, hook line and sinker, the corporations who profit directly (GM/Ford?Toyota) from their purchases or indirectly including JD Power and magazines and every one else who run their ads.
We all need a free market awareness course. The “free” in free market is the freedom corporations have to sell their goods, and has little to do with the consumer’s right to the truth in their purchase. These battles are grudgingly fought by the likes of Ralph Nader and CR and the frequently reluctant federal government.
This forum is valuable, because all of us taken collectively, have more trustworthy information to give than any JD Power survey. We are not for profit consumers and are here from our own good will, and any info we give that isn’t completely accurate is still experience motivated and NOT FOR PROFIT.
You tell me how we respond to anyone coming on the forum with “for profit” motives ? JD Power should be put in that same category.
I hope you will agree also that the federal govt. is getting increasingly corporate sponsored as well if not in definition, than in deed.
CR is listed as a non profit…
Def
"A nonprofit organization (abbreviated NPO, also not-for-profit[1]) is an organization that does not distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders, but instead uses them to help pursue its goals"
Right Dagosa; CR needs to generate REVENUE to cover the cost of salaries, facilities, buying all the things they test and then re-selling them for less.
As pointed out, whatever is left over is applied to improve facilities or provide more service to members, which I have been since 1968!
So it is not a profit making organization, as classifed by the US Internal Revenue Service.
CR accepts no money from companies; it is all financed by members. In some countries goverments give money to such organizations. That would make it dificult to criticize any government services.
So, for all its warts, CR is one of the world’s best product and sevice testing outfits.
Good Housekeeping seal of approval used to mean something; now I’m very suspect of anything “Guaranteed by Good Housekeeping”. It does mean that it’s not junk, I’ll concede that.
Toyota, and Honda owners buy these vehicles for there high resale value in which is do mainly because of there high reliability ratings in surveys. So would it not be a conflict of interest for owners of these vehicles to report all the cars problems in a survey which could diminish the value of there vehicle? The main reason for the purchase in the first place. It just makes you wonder how accurate the surveys are, even from CR.
I agree, but that’s a statement about the integrity of the survey participants, not CR. If the sample is interested enough and similar to those like forum participants here, I can trust the results. And, wouldn’t MB and Rover owners be even more motivated ?
Americar seems to confuse cause and effect. I bought a 2007 Toyota for a number of reasons, one of which was that I could not find any significant weaknesses going back 8 years.
Other cars I considered were Honda, Mazda and Hyundai, all without significant black marks in reliability. The Honda was too noisy, the Hyundai needed a deluxe package to get cruise control and the Mazda was noisy and less comfortable.I purpsely avoided Ford, Chrysler and GM models in the size range, since all these had a spotty record. I avoided Volkswagen because it had a very spotty reliability record and the very expensive parts and maintenance.
So far I have participated in several surveys to report any repairs or breakdowns. THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY!!! So I report “no repairs or breakdowns”. What is suspect about that? The CR annual survey covers cars, and a host of other chosen things such as computers, appliances, etc.
At cocktail parties I run into a lot of folks who lie about their car’s reliability. The more martinis the more reliable the car gets. One Audi owner who really loves his car said it was very reliable, but he did admit you have to budget $1000 per year MORE on maintenance and repairs than with other cars. The average US driver spends $1200 per year on maintenance, repairs and tires.
My ex neighbor had a CRV for 10 years and it never gave her a problem, she just did the required mainteance.
Owners who most “misrepresent” their cars, I found are those who own European models and weird luxury cars, as well as such money pits as Range Rovers.
P.S. Resale value means nothing to me when purchasing a car, since we normally wear the vehicle out or give it away to a needy relative as it ages.
It is the right thing to do. However, there is never a slam dunk liability. There have been two cases and neither have been proved that it was from the accelerator pedal.
Furthermore, there are some manufacturers that you and I are now paying for that have their full share of recalls with many deaths. No manufacturer is perfect but at least Toyota has the integrity to do the right thing.