[CheeseHead91182]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23390986

MSNBC
updated 3:32 p.m. ET, Thurs., Feb. 28, 2008

Consumer Reports awarded coveted "top pick" status to two Hyundai vehicles Thursday, marking the first time that South Korean models have been represented on the magazine's influential list.
The Hyundai Elantra SE small sedan and Santa Fe midsized sport utility vehicles were among the top 10 vehicles for 2008 unveiled in the magazine's April issue. The magazine's annual ratings, based on road tests and predicted safety and reliability are considered highly influential among consumers.
Other new models represented on the 2008 list included the Lexus LS460L luxury sedan and the redesigned Chevrolet Silverado, the first U.S.-made pickup truck to make the list since 2005. The Japanese-made Lexus, with a list price of $77,000, got a score of 99 out of 100 on the magazine's road test and was the highest rated vehicle for 2008.

The remaining six cars on the list retained their titles from 2007:

• Toyota Prius, green car
• Honda Accord, family sedan
• Mazda MX-5 Miata, fun to drive
• Infiniti G35, upscale sedan
• Toyota RAV4, small SUV
• Toyota Sienna, minivan

The Accord, a perennial winner, actually was edged out in Consumer Reports' ratings this year by the Nissan Altima. But the Altima lacked electronic stability control, a safety feature that was required for "top pick" status, according to the magazine editors.

Toyota has more cars on this list than any other car maker. What is more interesting is that Hyundia came in second place. I would also like to note that the so called Camry Killer/Super Accord Chevy Malibu is NOT the best family sedan. Consumer Reports must have been bought off by Honda to choose the Accord over the Malibu.

 

[Vmax2007]

CR is a JOKE....nuff said.

 

[ELL]

yeah; i agree with you vmax

 

[nyscene911]

CR is a JOKE....nuff said.

Its a joke to base your entire decision off of them. But generally its not bad to take a look there, along with a number of other places, when deciding on buying a new car.

Their info on dealer invoice etc. can be VERY valuable when negotiating, but in terms of their reliability ratings I'm very cold to them, as I think their methodology is prone to bias and results that don't reflect what a large part of the public would see on a day-to-day basis.

 

[engineer]

I thought we all agreed last year that CR was junk.

Honestly, how can any intelligent person take CR seriously when they themselves admit that there is zero statistical data that goes into “recommending” an all new Honda or Subaru (and Toyota up until last year). They admitted that, based on past performance, all new Honda’s, Subaru’s and Toyota’s get a recommended rating. . . . .

This is supposed to be “Consumers Report”, you know, a magazine that bases recommendations of consumer items on actual CONSUMERS REPORTS. How can they predict if an all new product will be reliable without these CONSUMERS REPORTS? What statistical data backs up their recommendations of these all new products?

CR is a JOKE, not worth the paper it’s written on. They took a serious credibility hit last year when they (finally) revealed that they do have bias and that they do rate vehicles differently (based on manufacture). Honda/Subaru/Toyota were on the “we know they are good so no need to wait for consumer data” list, then there’s the “lets wait for results, 6 months later, then maybe we will recommend them” list that all the other manufactures fall into. In the meantime, consumers are taking CR recommendation and buying a “recommended” vehicle, based on nothing more than CR bias. . . . .

Then the worse thing that could have happened to CR occurred last year. . . . .the “recommended” Camry and Tundra were not as reliable as CR had lead consumers to believe, and they had to admit this. . . . .In doing so, they also admitted their bias. . . . then took the step of taking all new Toyota’s off the “we know they are good so no need to wait for consumer data” list, and now they fall into the “regular” car company list of waiting for data before recommending. . . . .

Again, anyone that takes CR seriously gets what they deserve (a “recommended” vehicle that later becomes a “non recommended” vehicle once all the data is collected).

The ultimate question is: What’s the harm of waiting for the consumer data on Honda’s and Subaru’s (and Toyota’s of old). . . . What’s the rush?

Because of its findings, Consumer Reports will no longer recommend any new or redesigned Toyota-built models without reliability data on a specific design. Previously, new and redesigned Toyota models were recommended because of the automaker’s excellent track record, even if the publication didn’t have sufficient reliability data on the new model. If Toyota returns to its previous record of outstanding overall reliability, Consumer Reports said it may resume this practice.

Typically, the publication will only recommend a vehicle if the magazine has at least one year of reliability data for that specific model.

http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/10/consumer-report.html

Or who can forget about the all new Tundra getting a "Very Good" predicted reliability rating when it first came out, yet the all new Silverado was "too new to predict".

CR also gave the Tundra a predicted reliability rating of Very Good based on the reliability of past Tundras and Toyotas in general. The Silverado was labeled as too new to predict its reliability. In our eyes, the Tundra should have also been labeled as too new to predict its reliability, considering it is an all-new model built at an all-new assembly plant in San Antonio, TX. Mechanically speaking, the Tundra of today is completely different than the previous Tundra on which CR's reliability scores were based.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/10/consumer-reports-responds-to-pickup-comparo-controversy/

Again, CR is rubbish.

 

[Camread]

ugh, the prius doesn't come in green

 

[RAV4EVR]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23390986



Toyota has more cars on this list than any other car maker. What is more interesting is that Hyundia came in second place. I would also like to note that the so called Camry Killer/Super Accord Chevy Malibu is NOT the best family sedan. Consumer Reports must have been bought off by Honda to choose the Accord over the Malibu.

Hey...... HEY ?????

Any source that says anything Toyota positive is BAD source.
Any Toyota car is a bad car.
Any Toyota fan is an unintelligent & uneducated asshole because if he/she owns and likes a Toyota, he/she has definitly not done is "research" otherwise he/she would be driving a GM. It is your country people. Don't flush it down the toilet by buying, admiring, talking about Toyotas.

You got good GM news. We will welcome those in America.

This is America. Don't mention Toyota here. GM is our country's heartbeat and with recent Toyota gains in our country and people like you DARE to QUESTION GM's "quality" and "integrity"? It is like questioning your own country.

Do the "research" in a "GM lab" somewhere and you will notice that Toyota is nothing but crap.

Post on a toyota board where two kinds of people are missing:

1) A few Toyota owners who are unhappy with their life, own a Toyota and have to come bitch about it on a board.
2) GM owners who spend all day pissing on every single Toyota news because they are just very angry people.

The terrorist is Toyota.

AND yes... the PRIUS does come in a GREEN color. I know the "GM research and Development Facility" does not have that information.

I give a big applausse to the people who come to his board to do nothing but piss on every Toyota news without missing a single heart beat no matter how busy they are on their jobs all day long. That is what loyalty to the country is about. That is what a real American is.

LONG LIVE the USA and the GM !!!!!!!!!!

To the freedom.....

 

[CheeseHead91182]

I thought we all agreed last year that CR was junk.

Honestly, how can any intelligent person take CR seriously when they themselves admit that there is zero statistical data that goes into “recommending” an all new Honda or Subaru (and Toyota up until last year). They admitted that, based on past performance, all new Honda’s, Subaru’s and Toyota’s get a recommended rating. . . . .

This is supposed to be “Consumers Report”, you know, a magazine that bases recommendations of consumer items on actual CONSUMERS REPORTS. How can they predict if an all new product will be reliable without these CONSUMERS REPORTS? What statistical data backs up their recommendations of these all new products?

CR is a JOKE, not worth the paper it’s written on. They took a serious credibility hit last year when they (finally) revealed that they do have bias and that they do rate vehicles differently (based on manufacture). Honda/Subaru/Toyota were on the “we know they are good so no need to wait for consumer data” list, then there’s the “lets wait for results, 6 months later, then maybe we will recommend them” list that all the other manufactures fall into. In the meantime, consumers are taking CR recommendation and buying a “recommended” vehicle, based on nothing more than CR bias. . . . .

Then the worse thing that could have happened to CR occurred last year. . . . .the “recommended” Camry and Tundra were not as reliable as CR had lead consumers to believe, and they had to admit this. . . . .In doing so, they also admitted their bias. . . . then took the step of taking all new Toyota’s off the “we know they are good so no need to wait for consumer data” list, and now they fall into the “regular” car company list of waiting for data before recommending. . . . .

Again, anyone that takes CR seriously gets what they deserve (a “recommended” vehicle that later becomes a “non recommended” vehicle once all the data is collected).

The ultimate question is: What’s the harm of waiting for the consumer data on Honda’s and Subaru’s (and Toyota’s of old). . . . What’s the rush?



http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/10/consumer-report.html

Or who can forget about the all new Tundra getting a "Very Good" predicted reliability rating when it first came out, yet the all new Silverado was "too new to predict".



http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/10/consumer-reports-responds-to-pickup-comparo-controversy/

Again, CR is rubbish.

Why is it that everytime you post here its an attack against Toyota or GM spin control? You have claimed that you're not a GM fan boy, but your posts say otherwise. There have been negative posts about other car makers and you don't defend them, just GM. So why is that?

Back to the subject..

First off Consumer Reports states in the magazine that the new models are based on reliability of previous models. So next time read the fine print. And they choose to give new reliablity ratings to Toyota, Honda and a few others because history has shown that they pretty reliable unlike your precious GM. Also if Consumer Reports had any bias they wouldn't have taken the V6 camry off the recommended list.

Second their finds are based on data collected from magazine subscribers, if you subscribe to the magazine they send you a questionaire asking what prodcuts you have in your house and how you like them. Have you ever actually used consumer reports to buy any item? Because had you I bet you would find that their findings are usually right. And I am not just talking about cars, I have used them for TVs, Computers, DVD playeres and much more and I have never been unsatisfied when I purchased a product that they recommended.

Finally I think the only reason you are upset is because GM only had one car on this list. Had they been the company with the most cars on this list you would have probably posted it already. But since they only have one GM on this list the entire magazine is crap, right?

 

[RAV4EVR]

CheeseHead91182[/b]] Why is it that everytime you post here its an attack against Toyota or GM spin control? You have claimed that you're not a GM fan boy, but your posts say otherwise. There have been negative posts about other car makers and you don't defend them, just GM. So why is that?

No other company is a threat to GM at this moment. People who admired GM for almost a century now are very angry.

 

[SILVERadoTACOMA]

The redesigned Silverado is considerably improved. It achieves a nice balance between work attributes and livability, including a generous payload rating, a comfortable ride, improved interior quality and steering feel, and easy access. ESC is standard on all crew-cab models. Price: $27,000 to $39,000. The GMC Sierra is virtually identical to the Silverado. The redesigned Toyota Tundra outscored the Silverado in our tests, but first-year reliability of the 4WD, V8 version was below average.

Interesting.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...or-2007-4-07/overview/0704_top-picks-2007.htm

They should have had a small/midsize truck segment as well. The Tacoma *should* have won that.

 

[Vmax2007]

Anyone else notice that until recently, Toyota fans and CR fans were pretty much one in the same. Yet, since CR has crawled out of Toyota's bed (when they decided to no longer recommend the Camry and the new Tundra), suddenly alot of Toyota fans have jumped off the CR bandwagon?

Cheesehead, where is your thread that backs CR after the news of them dumping the Camry and new Tundra from their recommended list? Or doesn't that "count"?

No different than with the Motor Trend Truck of the Year Award. How many Toyota fans were talking about this award last year when the Silverado won it? Yet somehow this year it is the "Talk of the Toyota-Town". Or 2 years ago when the RIDGELINE won it? At least I can say I am consistant, even last year when the new Silvy won it, I said that award was a complete joke then and I still say it now. I wonder how many of the Toyota fans praising the Tundra for winning the 2007 MTTOTY award this year will give the same credit to Dodge when they win it next year? I am guessing suddenly that award will have lost all of it's credibility then, right?

Anyone who bases a vehicle buying decision on a report from a company that also rates vacuum cleaners and toasters is a damn fool IMO.

 

[Vmax2007]

LONG LIVE the USA and the GM !!!!!!!!!!

To the freedom.....

Damn!! that is a NICE looking truck, I'm gonna have to get me one of them...oh wait, nevermind, already did .

 

[EKam]

Hey mods can we get this toyota fan boy outta here?

 

[engineer]

Why is it that everytime you post here its an attack against Toyota or GM spin control? You have claimed that you're not a GM fan boy, but your posts say otherwise. There have been negative posts about other car makers and you don't defend them, just GM. So why is that?

Um, I was talking about CR, not Toyota. I’m sorry that your feelings were hurt that I used CR latest controversy to illustrate a point, and that just so happen to involve Toyota.

Back to the subject..

First off Consumer Reports states in the magazine that the new models are based on reliability of previous models. So next time read the fine print.

No, you’re wrong. All new (or substantially redesigned) vehicles get a predicted reliability rating of “too new to predict”, except for Honda’s and Subaru’s (and Toyota’s up until October of last year). CR has admitted that these manufactures get a “very good” predicted reliability rating, despite them not having any data to back that up. This is where CR got caught with their pants down last year, and the reason Toyota is no longer (automatically) receiving the “Very Good” predicted reliability for the foreseeable future. CR found that when the survey results were finally tallied, the V6 Camry and 4x4 Tundra’s were below average reliability, so they had to issue a retraction of their earlier recommendation, and an apology to its readers, iirc.

Again, I ask, why is CR so eager to publish results with zero data to back up these results. Why not just wait until all the numbers are in, for every manufacture, then post the results. . . . . this is what the “Consumer Reports” name implies, is it not? What is their hurry for Honda and Subaru results?

And they choose to give new reliablity ratings to Toyota, Honda and a few others because history has shown that they pretty reliable unlike your precious GM. Also if Consumer Reports had any bias they wouldn't have taken the V6 camry off the recommended list.

History should not be taken into account for a statistically based, consumer magazine that many people reference when buying vehicles. I could care less if the old vehicles were reliable, because I’m not buying an old vehicle. . . . I’m buying a new one, and I want to know this new one is reliable before I lay down $25k on it. . . .

I don’t want to be told “Sorry!! The old (blank) was reliable and we based our recommendations for the new (blank) on those old (blanks), but now that we have the results in, it looks as though the new (blank) is not reliable. Sorry you wasted your $25k. . . .”

I’ll say it again. Why not wait for real results before posting whether this (blank) is reliable or not. . . . .

Second their finds are based on data collected from magazine subscribers, if you subscribe to the magazine they send you a questionaire asking what prodcuts you have in your house and how you like them.

And that’s my other issue with CR. What about those that do not subscribe? What about those that buy CR off of the news stand, or read it at a doctors office? Basically what you have is 1.3 million lemmings that follow CR, then report back to CR on the items CR recommended. . . . .and these things were recommended by the same person who took CR recommendations. In other words, it’s a vicious cycle, and the only people that get to influence CR are the same people who take CR recommendations. No outside data points. . . . .quite “scientific”, wouldn’t you say?

Have you ever actually used consumer reports to buy any item? Because had you I bet you would find that their findings are usually right. And I am not just talking about cars, I have used them for TVs, Computers, DVD playeres and much more and I have never been unsatisfied when I purchased a product that they recommended.

No, I actually do real research and go to enthusiast forums for advice. . . . you know, from experts that actually use these items and who actually know a little something about them.

Take for instance my digital camera. I went to several camera/photographer forums and asked which small digital camera was the best. . . . the result? A camera that real experts use and that real experts recommend. . . .not some camera that won a popularity contest with the lemmings of the world, and not a camera that could be operated by the lowest common denominator of our society. . . .

Real research. . . . .what a concept.

Finally I think the only reason you are upset is because GM only had one car on this list. Had they been the company with the most cars on this list you would have probably posted it already. But since they only have one GM on this list the entire magazine is crap, right?

No, I could car less who won what at CR. . . . . .be it a toaster, or a family sedan. CR is for lazy people who can read dots. . . . .

 

[CheeseHead91182]

Um, I was talking about CR, not Toyota. I’m sorry that your feelings were hurt that I used CR latest controversy to illustrate a point, and that just so happen to involve Toyota.

Back to the subject..



No, you’re wrong. All new (or substantially redesigned) vehicles get a predicted reliability rating of “too new to predict”, except for Honda’s and Subaru’s (and Toyota’s up until October of last year). CR has admitted that these manufactures get a “very good” predicted reliability rating, despite them not having any data to back that up. This is where CR got caught with their pants down last year, and the reason Toyota is no longer (automatically) receiving the “Very Good” predicted reliability for the foreseeable future. CR found that when the survey results were finally tallied, the V6 Camry and 4x4 Tundra’s were below average reliability, so they had to issue a retraction of their earlier recommendation, and an apology to its readers, iirc.

Again, I ask, why is CR so eager to publish results with zero data to back up these results. Why not just wait until all the numbers are in, for every manufacture, then post the results. . . . . this is what the “Consumer Reports” name implies, is it not? What is their hurry for Honda and Subaru results?



History should not be taken into account for a statistically based, consumer magazine that many people reference when buying vehicles. I could care less if the old vehicles were reliable, because I’m not buying an old vehicle. . . . I’m buying a new one, and I want to know this new one is reliable before I lay down $25k on it. . . .

I don’t want to be told “Sorry!! The old (blank) was reliable and we based our recommendations for the new (blank) on those old (blanks), but now that we have the results in, it looks as though the new (blank) is not reliable. Sorry you wasted your $25k. . . .”

I’ll say it again. Why not wait for real results before posting whether this (blank) is reliable or not. . . . .





And that’s my other issue with CR. What about those that do not subscribe? What about those that buy CR off of the news stand, or read it at a doctors office? Basically what you have is 1.3 million lemmings that follow CR, then report back to CR on the items CR recommended. . . . .and these things were recommended by the same person who took CR recommendations. In other words, it’s a vicious cycle, and the only people that get to influence CR are the same people who take CR recommendations. No outside data points. . . . .quite “scientific”, wouldn’t you say?




No, I actually do real research and go to enthusiast forums for advice. . . . you know, from experts that actually use these items and who actually know a little something about them.

Take for instance my digital camera. I went to several camera/photographer forums and asked which small digital camera was the best. . . . the result? A camera that real experts use and that real experts recommend. . . .not some camera that won a popularity contest with the lemmings of the world, and not a camera that could be operated by the lowest common denominator of our society. . . .

Real research. . . . .what a concept.



No, I could car less who won what at CR. . . . . .be it a toaster, or a family sedan. CR is for lazy people who can read dots. . . . .

You may have been critizing Consumer Reports but it was only because they were giving praise to Toyota. Like I said before, if GM had the most cars on the list you would have posted this article yesterday. And if Consumer Reports was such garbage like you claim they wouldn't have changed their minds because they have no bias and are looking out for the consumer's best intrest. Anything that praises Toyota or Dogs GM is crap in your eyes.

You have some nerve talking about research. Last time I checked a reputable magazine is better than getting someone's advice off the internet where 500 lb. females can claim to have the body of Beyonce and crack heads can claim to be engineers. Have you ever actually written a reasearch paper? If you had you would know that postings on a forum are not considered research and couldn't be used as a source, but a magazine like consumer reports could be.

Seriously, why do you come to this site if you hate Toyota so much? It makes no sense to me how much time you spend arguing with people on this site. Why not just go post at GMI and you can dog Toyota as much as you want and no one will care.

 

[RAV4EVR]

Hey mods can we get this toyota fan boy outta here?

Yes. Do that.. Hypocracy is what this board runs on anyway. It says toyotanation yet we can't sit in peace and read any Toyota news article and have the mind to interpret it one's own way without drying off GM fan boy piss off of it first and having GM fan boy piss on my hands first. That is the prerequisite. Not one article or news is posted here and immediately not drenched in GM piss. Yet, the mods appreciate that. I don't mind free speech and anybody's opinion but there is a limit to it.

RESPECT is something GM fanboys need to learn. It is like they are running aorund without leash and go ahead and lock up the Toyota fan boys because they wish to read and interpret Toyota news without GM urine on it EACH and EVERY TIME for years. Not any car or any news we can discuss or read without junk responses to it by the SAME people OVER AND OVER again.

I don't mind a person giving opinions on something but every time an article is posted the article is same, "It is crap".

If the RESPECT is not expected, then yes, please DELETE my id.

If you guys love GM anymore, make sure my id is deleted within 24 hours or shame on you for promoting Toyota.

 

[engineer]

Yes. Do that.. Hypocracy is what this board runs on anyway. It says toyotanation yet we can't sit in peace and read any Toyota news article and have the mind to interpret it one's own way without drying off GM fan boy piss off of it first and having GM fan boy piss on my hands first. That is the prerequisite. Not one article or news is posted here and immediately not drenched in GM piss. Yet, the mods appreciate that. I don't mind free speech and anybody's opinion but there is a limit to it.

RESPECT is something GM fanboys need to learn. It is like they are running aorund without leash and go ahead and lock up the Toyota fan boys because they wish to read and interpret Toyota news without GM urine on it EACH and EVERY TIME for years. Not any car or any news we can discuss or read without junk responses to it by the SAME people OVER AND OVER again.

I don't mind a person giving opinions on something but every time an article is posted the article is same, "It is crap".

If the RESPECT is not expected, then yes, please DELETE my id.

If you guys love GM anymore, make sure my id is deleted within 24 hours or shame on you for promoting Toyota.

:drama: , and here I thought this thread was about CR and it's (ir)relevance.

Instead it gets turned into a :sosad: session. How about staying on topic and discuss CR's findings, and stay away from your pent up frustration towards opposing viewpoints. Articulate a point, and defend it. . . . . lets no boo-hoo and :cursin:.


Here, this is just for you:

:grouphug:

 

[kdhspyder]

CR is a JOKE....nuff said.

Yeah how they picked the Silverado is beyond the scope of reality..j/k

 

[RAV4EVR]

:drama: , and here I thought this thread was about CR and it's (ir)relevance.

Instead it gets turned into a :sosad: session. How about staying on topic and discuss CR's findings, and stay away from your pent up frustration towards opposing viewpoints. Articulate a point, and defend it. . . . . lets no boo-hoo and :cursin:.


Here, this is just for you:

:grouphug:

Discussing CR's findings????

Discussing CR's findings????

OR

See you piss on them each and every time because the word Toyota is mentioned on it.

I would love to see a "discussion" without having your pee on it first.

 

[kdhspyder]

Yes. Do that.. Hypocracy is what this board runs on anyway. It says toyotanation yet we can't sit in peace and read any Toyota news article and have the mind to interpret it one's own way without drying off GM fan boy piss off of it first and having GM fan boy piss on my hands first. That is the prerequisite. Not one article or news is posted here and immediately not drenched in GM piss. Yet, the mods appreciate that. I don't mind free speech and anybody's opinion but there is a limit to it.

RESPECT is something GM fanboys need to learn. It is like they are running aorund without leash and go ahead and lock up the Toyota fan boys because they wish to read and interpret Toyota news without GM urine on it EACH and EVERY TIME for years. Not any car or any news we can discuss or read without junk responses to it by the SAME people OVER AND OVER again.

I don't mind a person giving opinions on something but every time an article is posted the article is same, "It is crap".

If the RESPECT is not expected, then yes, please DELETE my id.

If you guys love GM anymore, make sure my id is deleted within 24 hours or shame on you for promoting Toyota.

It's the same over at GMI only in reverse so what's fair is fair. It's only words afterall.