I'd highly recommend checking out the Kia equivalents as well. IMO, they are usually better-designed inside and out than the Hyundais. They also, for some reason, often rank higher on the reliability scale.....for reasons I can't fathom.


Your call, but I don't think you would be happy with a entry-level M-B product. Even considering the lower prices, many reviewers (including Consumer Reports) don't think the level of quality and refinement in these vehicles are worth what they cost. The S-class, on the other hand, sets an industry benchmark...but the cost is prohibitive.

 

We are going to. This is not a rush for us. Have you seen the satisfaction scores for KIA and Hyundai in CR?

We think the new A class interior is outstanding for what it is. Issue is, that it seems like a lot of money for a small car. That was the central issue with my CT, which looking back, we probably should of just kept.

 

I'm sorry--you are now quoting CR after years of bashing it as worthless??

 

Haven't been able to copy/post them, but, in general, Kia rank higher than Hyundais, and, on average, are more reliable. Genesis, however, takes the spot as the top-rated brand for satisfaction.



I know you didn't like the CT.....I wasn't wild about it either, except for the superb NuLuxe upholstery, which could fool everyone but the cow LOL. Also, since you were mentioning the CT's price...obviously, you were paying, at least in part, for the nameplate.

 

No need to be sorry. If you look back at my comments, I am highly critical of two things; one, CR reviews are not "day and date" with other car reviewers. And two, their reliability data methods are not disclosed. Does not mean their information is not valid, it means it is open for interpretation of how valid. Where I was looking about CR satisfaction is where they claim what the owners are saying. Does this make sense to you?

 

CR does the same vehicle-reliability-surveys each year....sent out to their subscribers in the mail (or on-line) That is no secret, and has been well-known for decades. In those vehicle-reliabilty surveys, of course, are included a number of other things....appliances, lawn-mowers, furnace/heat-pumps, etc.... almost anything that breaks down and/or will need repair.

 

So how do you (yourself personally) determine how valid these surveys are?

 

Not really. Because if you question the reliability data, which is obtained (probably in large part) from subscriber/owner surveys (which I fill out every year), then the owner satisfaction data comes from the same "suspect" source.

A 75+ year track record.

 

I agree. So my criticism of CR is that they lack transparency in their reliability data, and their satisfaction data. That does not mean their information is worthless, it means that I have some questions about it. Their reviews which are rarely ever released on the day of the press embargo are more suspect than their other data.

 

Fair enough. I don't think that is very effective way to judge their information.

 

Here is their early look at the 2017 Elantra.

.

 

Thanks.

It does have a lot of features.

 

You missed my point. A warranty has exclusions. So does an insurance policy. A warranty is a type of contract between parties, as is an insurance policy. CTJill is saying she's surprised at things that are not covered and are not quite living up to the "bumper to bumper" advertising tag. Very few things live up to the ad hype. Those fancy big dollar insurance advertisements are an eg.

 

I am not sure what the problem is at this point. I was under the impression that the Hyundai 5 year warranty was a complete warranty, but it is not. It is a limited warranty with a few exclusions. I am sure the Toyota warranty has the same similar exclusions,

But it is not a bumper to bumper. Its a limited policy, that is where my confusion was. You just made the error of thinking that the advertising tag is bumper to bumper. Toyota's warranty is a limited warranty as well.

 

And I would suggest you miss the point. You take two unlike things, and try and compare them because they both use the words "exclusion".