mmarshall

Toyota trucks aren't always foolproof. The first true full-size Tundra, for instance, when it debuted in 2007, had a number of cheap, flimsy, substandard plastic parts on it which broke or wore out easily, and some tailgates were bending/warping under load. You yourself complained about (and made a number of negative posts) on the C-Channel frames.

As bit mentioned, though, don't want to stay off-topic.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

i just dug out the link from the auto blog article (thanks for letting us know it was in there).
link here: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...to-z-index.htm

the table on this page shows how bizarre cr is. they have checkboxes for 'recommended' models. some notes:
they 'recommend' every single mazda model.
they recommend 8 out of 11 audi models.
they recommend several bmw models, but i note they recommend the 3 series but not 4 series. really?
they don't recommend a single ford, chevy, and ram pickup truck. the ford f-150 is the highest selling vehicle, EVERY YEAR, for DECADES. and they don't recommend it?
but they recommend the toyota tundra.
yet they recommend vw eos and tiguan, vehicles that sell a handful a year.
they recommend the tesla s, despite all its reported issues??
the only mb models they recommend are gle/glc. really? not even the s-class?

they have almost NO credibility.
does anyone think even true believers of cr will be less likely to buy a civic because says it isn't recommended?

mmarshall

Is his a new one?

I don't personally know anyone, over the years, that ever got a lemon for a Civic, either. The only significant issue they had that I know of was a rear-suspension issue on some of the Hybrid models, years ago.

mmarshall

I don't have the hard figures in front of me, but it could (?) be a difference between the crash-performance of the sedan and coupe. Vehicles even on the same general platform and body sometimes have different body-crush-characteristics between two-door and four-door versions.

The F-150's reliability record has been spotty and up/down, sometimes being better than average and sometimes worse. It must be at least average in the latest ranking to be on the Recommended list. The reliability of Dodge Ram trucks, of course, despite their amazing chassis and driving characteristics, has been in the basement for years.

SW17LS

Yep, 2016.

JDR76

Nah, I just have some seat time in one and was thoroughly impressed.

ArmyofOne

Meh, at the end of the day, I let my own knowledge and experience tell me what is good and what is not.

I have had 2 civic's, and driven countless others. We currently have a 2014 Civic EX, which I could take or leave, but its my wife's car, she bought it and she loves it, so thats all that matters. I happen to think the only thing on the car I don't like really is the CVT, and even its not all that bad, it just takes a bit of getting used to. I put a couple hundred thousand miles on my 2006 Civic EX, which was indestructible, and I loved every mile. If I was smart, I would have kept it to this day.

I have also had several people tell me "Don't buy (Dodge) Ram trucks! They are awful!" My own father chastized me for it. My entire family are Ford and Chevy Fanboys. I have had 4 now since 2006. I have clocked over a half a million miles in Ram Trucks. I have only every had one issue that was serious, it was a torque converter, and it was under warranty. Thats a pretty outstanding real-world reliability rating in my book. These aren't "test miles". These are beat-on-it, *****-to-the-wall, no-BS, I-can't-believe-I-just-pulled-that-with-a-half-ton-truck, miles. I demand a lot from my truck. Never once in all that time has one left me sitting anywhere. But sadly, they aren't even on the CR reliability reports radar.

Moral of the story, Don't put too much stock into reliability ratings. Trust your experience and your gut. Go drive the thing. Ask your friends if they like theirs. Don't rely on others to do your research for you.

Toys4RJill

Agreed. The Civic is a very impressive car. CR is full of it.

Aron9000

I've had a couple of buddies who had to put new manual transmissions in their Civics around 100k miles. Synchros went out, started grinding into gear. Of course both of them bought them used, they were the 2 door/5 speed models, so the previous owner might have been some ricer douche who drove it like they stole it thinking they were Vin Diesel or Paul Walker.

But yeah, other than the ugly new rear tailights and ugly hatchback model, the new Civic is a nice car, looks like Honda really did their homework this time instead of just phoning it in last time they redesigned this car. If consumer reports couldn't find one on the lot optioned like they want and said there wasn't any inventory at the dealer, that should tell you something, especially considering the small sedan/coupe segment isn't really a hot seller right now.

mmarshall

It's not unusual for manual transmissions to need work or replacement before automatics do. Manual transmissions typically get heavy wear on the clutch linings, clutch-discs/pressure-plates, throwout bearings, and synchros, though synchro wear can be minimized by what are called "heel and toe" shifts if the pedal-spacing easily allows it.

Aron9000

^ On a manual the clutch will need replacement probably once or twice during the life of the car, sometimes a lot more frequently on certain sports cars. On most cars its a $500-800 job. Actually replacing the whole manual transmission, like on my friends Civic, is BS, the transmission and synchros should last the life of the car if you don't abuse it.

Fizzboy7

The new Civic is selling better than any new small car I have ever seen in my three decades of observing. There's tons and tons of brand new ones every day on my drive passed the local college. People love them. I am about the only one who hasn't. But that's my problem.
So CR has an issue with the volume control? Doesn't the Civic have a duplicate adjustment on the steering wheel like all modern cars do? I don't think anyone tries reaching over to the center console to adjust volume. If that's the case, it's a pretty lame critique. And I'd be the last one to defend this frumpy new Cross-turd of a car with alien taillights.

bagwell

LOL, you'd be stupid not to at least do more research on the new civic after it got a shti reliability rating....due to OWNERS reports...........no matter how pretty people think it looks or the features it has.

bagwell

Oh ok so based one 1 civic having no issues in 4mos it's a great vehicle? Lol

SW17LS

Personal experience means a lot. When you couple that with on Hondas reputation for building really reliable cars this is a very surprising result.

I think their history of building really reliable cars would earn them the privilege of a little benefit of the doubt if there are some surprising early issue reports.

My issue with CR's recommendations is the focus they are putting on their subjective reviews now and how they build them into an overall "vehicle score". For instance in the ultra luxury segment they have the 7 Series #1 despite average reliability, and the Tesla #2 despite all their reported issues with CR, LS is 3. The reason the 7 and Tesla are so high is because of their subjective drive test scores (how are they calculating a "96" drive vs an "89" drive?).

In my opinion consumer reports should be about reliability. When I want an opinion of driving I can get that from my own experience with the products, as I would with a stove or washing machine. What I can't get from spending time with the product is it's history of reliability, that's what I want from CR.

Sounds to me like the removal of the recommended tag for the Civic was based more on their subjective opinion and not actual data, which I don't think is right.