Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

10 Japanese-branded cars that don’t make the grade

Disappointing cars and SUVs that earn a failing road test score
Published: August 28, 2013 10:00 AM
Find Ratings blob logo

Small cars
SUVs

Most Japanese car brands have a hard-earned reputation for offering dependable, fuel-efficient cars. Look no further than our annual brand report cards, where you’ll find the top seven brands are all Japanese based on average road-test score and reliability. But that’s not to say that Japanese cars are all veritable road scholars. In fact, there are quite a few that haven’t scored high enough to be eligible for a Consumer Reports recommendation.

As students return to school, we thought it would be interesting to look at those models that effectively earned an F, scoring below 60. For our “recommended” status, Consumer Reports holds vehicles to an even higher standard, requiring a 65-point score for most car types to achieve a passing grade. Some classes are even more demanding, such as luxury cars.

Common among many of these disappointing models are trade-offs in ride, handling, fit and finish, and noise. Small cars, from all nations, tend to be vulnerable to such criticisms. Looking beyond class, the recurring theme is that these are vehicles that were not engineered to their potential and are not considered competitive.

Below we present the bottom 10 Japanese cars in our Ratings, with a tie for the 10th spot, along with the highs and lows for each.
Overall road-test score Make and model Lows

29 Scion iQ Ride, noise, acceleration, steering, driving position, fit and finish, radio controls, blind spots, tiny rear seat.

31 Mitsubishi i-MiEV SE Short range, long charge time, weak heat, acceleration, ride, agility, driving postion, spartan interior, complicated radio.

36 Toyota FJ Cruiser Visibility, ride, handling, noise, fit and finish, access.

41 Toyota Yaris LE Noise, ride, agility, driving position, front seat comfort, fit and finish, radio controls, rear visibility.

50 Toyota Tacoma (V6) Ride, handling, driving position, high step-in, low rear seat.

53 Toyota Prius C Two Acceleration, ride, noise, driving position, rear visibility, fit and finish.

53 Nissan Versa SV Handling, engine noise, front-seat comfort, fit and finish, reliability.

54 Honda Insight EX Acceleration, handling, ride, noise, rear seat.

55 Toyota 4Runner SR5 (V6) Handling, ride, driving position, fit and finish, access, turning circle.

57 Honda CR-Z EX Only two seats, noise, ride, visibility, access, AC shut-off at stop.

57 Mitsubishi Outlander SE (4-cyl.) Noise, ride, agility, acceleration, front-seat comfort, fit and finish

Consumer Reports is sometimes accused in enthusiast forums of favoring Japanese cars and being biased against American cars. The truth is, we report without fear or favor. (Learn how we test cars.) And our lists of best and worst cars tell quite a different story. In fact, two of the top three ranked cars overall in our tests are American. None are Japanese.

So, are we biased? Yes, toward good performing, safe, and reliable cars.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/n...rade/index.htm

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

I'd have to agree with everything except the Tacoma. It may be long overdue for a redesign but it is still very competent.

84Cressida

Not recommending the FJ Cruiser, 4Runner, and Tacoma for "harsh ride" and high step in height is completely stupid.

It is quite good to see CR defend themselves against idotic domestic fanboys, the only ones that actually think they're biased in favor of Toyota or Honda.

Aron9000

Pretty ridiculous of them to berate the Tacoma. Granted its been unchanged forever, but I'd buy one of these over a Nissan Frontier any day of the week. Both GM and Ford stopped producing small/midsized trucks, IMO Toyota is the only game in town.

Although I will admit you pay a premium for that smaller size. Toyota, GM, Ford, Dodge, and Nissan will sell you a bigger truck for slightly less $$$$. IMO the Tacoma is overpriced for what it is, despite it being a very well engineered and bulletproof piece of machine. Even on the used market its way overpriced for what you are getting IMO>

SteVTEC

Maybe the harsh ride in the Tacoma was fine 10 years ago, but hasn't mmarshall said that some of the best riding modern vehicles he's ridden in or driven have been pickup trucks? Pickup trucks have evolved a ton, so it could just be that the Taco is no longer making the grade if it hasn't been updated. The bar is raised over time.

mmarshall

Yep....check out some of the new Dodge Rams (especially the non-heavy-duty ones), and you'll see just what I was saying.

mmarshall

Several of the findings on this list, IMO, aren't surprising. The Scion iQ, despite the fact that its build-quality is much better than the Smart-for-Two, is still too small for most American roads and comfort-levels. Same with the Mitsu i-MiEV electric. The Toyota Yaris, Prius C, Nissan Versa, and Honda Insight, though generally reliable, are all obviously built to El Cheapo budgets. The Honda CR-Z is an interesting concept, but I wasn't impressed with the hybrid powertrain on the one I reviewed.....it was too much like the unrefined one on the cheaper Insight. The CR-Z's only claim to fame (besides the obvious link to the old and much-beloved CRX) is that it is the only gas-electric hybrid in the American market with a conventional three-pedal manual transmission.

I8ABMR

The only reason its news is because they are Japanese. Cool to see them emphasize their objectivity.

Sulu

Does Consumer Reports compare everything to mid-size sedans -- Camry and Accord?

Tiny rear seat? It is a tiny, 2+2 city car!

Long charge time, weak heat and spartan interior? It is a tiny, ELECTRIC car!

Access? It is a truck-based, body-on-frame SUV!

High step-in? It is a truck-based, body-on-frame pickup truck!

Acceleration? It is a small, inexpensive, gas-electric hybrid car designed and built to be cheap to buy and cheap to operate!

Rear seat? It is a tiny hybrid!

Only two seats? Are they serious? How can they really criticise a 2-seater for only having 2 seats? It would be like criticising the Nissan Leaf for not using any gasoline!

mmarshall

Not quite. A number of cars are still compared to the BMW 3-series.

gorskiqne

It may be long overdue for a redesign but it is still very competent.

spwolf

I think CR should focus on their reliability ratings and less on their car ratings which are stupid - as proven above, as a lot of these cars above are KBB's top 10 resale values, which means customers love them and CR is doing it wrong.

SteVTEC

What nonsense. If you think it's so stupid to point out things that are bad about particular vehicles, then why even bother to review cars at all? It's 'wrong' somehow to point out that an electric vehicle has a long charge time, or that a gas-electric hybrid has lousy acceleration, or that a body-on-frame truck or SUV has a high step in height? Maybe it's obvious to car buffs like us, but people in general probably don't. Do you think CR will say that the BMW i3 has lousy acceleration? What about the GS450h? The Honda Fit EV does NOT have lousy acceleration, and I would know because I've driven one. They're perfectly right to point this stuff out to people, even if some of it is characteristic of the type of vehicle. Sometimes it isn't, though. CR is far more consistent in their automotive reviews than any other publication I've read, including the U.S. ones who will miraculously come up with new test methodologies as needed just to favor a particular brand or make. CR is consistent.

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

You only touched on acceleration,seating room and access.
What about the other complaints like noise,ride,fit and finish etc?Those negatives are more important to me.

LexBob2

Good points. I think that CR is just pointing out what they didn't care for and then it's up to the reader to determine whether or not those areas are important to them.