Toys4RJill

Yes you are a little puzzled. You are bit a excited perhaps?

I have never had much of an a issue with CR's reliability data. It is biased and it would be nice to see what their method is. Its not scientific either.

My big issue is with their reviews.

I am surprised by Buick Lacrosse as time and time again we hear that Buick or GM for that matter has been getting better, then they lay a turd. Surprised too that Tacoma has reliability issues.

But nobody really knows for sure what is up CR's sleeve as they don't allow us to know what their method or data really is.

MattyG

Ok then. So on the one hand there's a problem with biased data and survey collection but on the other hand there is no problem with the reliability data? IMHO you have a contradiction of terms here. Respectfully, would you consider the fact that JD Power, seems to mimic CR's reliability data, but no one wants to bash JD Power, why is that?

http://www.jdpower.com/cars/study/Ve...y-Make/1881ENG

oldcajun

My issue with CR's "reliability data" is there is no weighting for the seriousness of the problem. They downgrade a complaint about a slow infotainment system or rough low speed dual clutch transmission the same as they do a failure of the fuel injection pump. I still think they are a valuable reference, but with some detail look at why they downgrade a specific car. They use consumer complaints as there data source without respect for consumer expectations. For instance, a rattle I might not report on my Civic is a big issue on my Lexus because I expect the Lexus to be perfect. Their ratings are useful information, but not the final decision maker.
Steve

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

^^^ oldcajun, excellent post, thank you.

it could be renamed "Subjective Reports"

Johnhav430

They overweighted stalling issues on BMW 335i's back in 2007-2009 to the point where the car got all black dots and got put on the avoid and most unreliable lists. then they heard there was a factory recall on hpfps, and now put the cars onto the recommended list, when in fact there were not many cases of stalling other than an ABC News report exaggerating the issue. This is how easily imho the publication is swayed, with no scientific data whatsoever. If Monte Hall shows you door #3 has a bunch of two ******** billy goats, and asks you do you still want door #1, or would you rather take #2? You should always take door #2. There is more science in the above decision, than there is on any of CR's work, be it cars, vacuum cleaners, or air fresheners.

Are they wrong in putting Lexus and Toyota at the top? Of course not, it's a safe bet. But that's all it is....my .02

Toys4RJill

JD powers is just as biased. If not more. The big car manufacturers pay for the data. It's important to certain manufacturers if it benefits them. Just like Toyota. I would bet Toyota and Honda look at CR favourably while Jag and Land Rover likely dismiss it.

But wirhout seeing the data. It is impossible to overcome their own bias that they are pandering to their subscriber base.

Johnhav430

When you go to a GMC dealer and see a JD Power plaque for initial quality inside, that should be a hint as to how valid JD Power is as an entity.....in a different field, Gartner is just as invalid. So many organizations wanting to be the gold standard. It's $$$$$. Just thought of another, Gallup.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

JD etc. may be bought and paid for, and CR isn't, just incompetent. great choices...

Johnhav430

Overheard at the corporate offices, summer 2014.

Mike Quincy: "Did that payment from Volkswagen of America come in yet?"

Staff member: "Mike, who are you talking to?"

Mike Quincy: "I'm talking to accounting!"

Staff member: "No, they sent an email, they're not paying this time after we slammed the 2011 Jetta."

Mike Quincy: "Enuf said."

A simple click of Mike Quincy's mouse, and the review is published:

"It's not that big a deal," editor Mike Quincy says. "You take out the GTI's steering wheel, the GTI badging and put me in it, and I think 'This is a redesigned Golf.' There's nothing sporty about this car."

mmarshall

I disagree. CR has Engine (Major /Minor) and transmission (Major / Minor) categories......and they clearly explain both.

This is a direct quote from their explanations:

Engine Major

Engine rebuild or replacement, cylinder head, head gasket, turbo or supercharger, timing chain or timing belt.

Engine Minor

Accessory belts and pulleys, engine computer, engine mounts, engine knock or ping, oil leaks.

Transmission Major

Transmission rebuild or replacement, torque converter, clutch replacement

Transmission Minor

Gear selector or linkage, leaks, transmission computer, transmission sensor or solenoid, clutch adjustment, rough shifting, slipping transmission.

MattyG

Guess so. Is Forbes a little more credible for you with a contributor's 2013 article? I agree that maybe CR only reports the nuts and bolts vs what a luxury buyer's wants vs needs are defined as. Luxury German car buyers will tolerate more in terms of issues, because they're likely in those cars for badge prestige and of course, for driving fun.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterco.../#66751c3d4871