Yearly Gripe About Consumer Reports Car Survey

Well I just got my 2008 Consumer Reports Survey Form. As usual I am
shocked by how little information they gather and dismayed by how
seriously people take the results.

Here are the "car"questions and my comments:

There were general introductory questions about the car model (2 max)
and miles driven for each vehicle. These were followed by the specific
information gathering questions:

1) "If you had any problems with your car in the past 12 months that
you considered SERIOUS because of cost, failure, safety, or downtime,
select the appropriate box(es) for each car.

INCLUDE PROBLEMS COVERED BY WARRANTY. DO NOT INCLUDE: 1) problems
resulting from accident damage; 2) recalls; or 3) replacement of
normal maintenance items (brake pads, batteries) unless they were
replaced much sooner or more often than expected." Various categories
are listed (the ones in the magazine with the circles).

My comment - CR is depending on the car owner to decide what is
serious. Well that might be fine for you, but how do you know what I
will find serious? My Sister drove around for years in a Honda that
sounded like a Saturn V on take-off. She was fine with that. I drove
the car to work one day and swore I'd never drive it again. My SO's
RAV4 has rear seat releases that don't work -they never have. She
could care less. It drives me crazy. The cruise control on Her RAV4
won't allow you to drive certain speeds if the A/C is on - it just
goes crazy, upshifting and downshifting, etc. She could care less -
not a problem. I think it is a major problem.

2) "Considering all factors (price, performance, reliability, comfort,
enjoyment, etc.) would you get this car if you had it to do all over
again?"

My comment - What does this mean? If I could go back to 2006, would I
make the same buying decision? When they provide me a time machine,
this question would make sense. I am sure if I bought a new car today,
I would by a different car, but not because there is anything wrong
with my current car, I would want something different, and there are
new choices.

3) "How satisfied are you with this vehicle with respect to each of
the following?" Various areas are listed.

My comment - just asking an opinion - no hard data.

4) "Did this vehicle get any maintenance (e.g., oil change/ lube/tire
rotations) or repairs in the past 12 months?"

My comment - this was really a transition question into a portion of
the survey related to car repair. It might be interesting if they
published the results of this by model.

5) "In the following question, exclude accident repair and new tires.
Which, if any, of the following performed the maintenance and
repairs?" The list included dealers, independents, fast lube places,
other.

My comment - no real relationship to the quality of the car. I
answered "other," so I did not see any follow-up questions.

6) "Did you buy any new tires for this vehicle in the past 12 months?"

My comment - not sure why they asked. I did not buy tires last year,
so I did not see any follow-up questions.

7) "Was any work done in the past 12 months (excluding accident
damage) covered by a warranty or by a recall notice?"

My comment - I had no repair or recall work done in the last 12
months, so I answered no and did not see any follow-up questions.

8) "About how much did you pay in total for maintenance and repair of
this vehicle in the past 12 months? Include all out-of-pocket costs
for tires, parts, fluids and labor. Select appropriate category.
Select 'None" if you had no out-of-pocket costs for this vehicle
during this period."

My comment - at least this was an attempt to get some "hard" data, but
it is a feeble one. How many people actually know how much they spent?
I do my own oil changes, so I estimated the cost of the 4 oil changes
I did last year. That was my total maintenance unless you wanted to
include going through the car wash. A person that took their car to
the dealer for oil changes probably paid 4 or 5 times as much for the
same services. How is that accounted for? Why do they ask about tires
here, but not in other sections? Tire wear is heavily influenced by
the driver and location. Tire replacement is not a yearly expense. I
wonder how this figures into the maintenance cost for a new model that
was first introduced in say 2005? Seems like the money spent on tire
replacement would spike after the model was 2 or 3 years old.

Ed

"C. E. White" > wrote in message
news:47fa379f$1@kcnews01...
> Well I just got my 2008 Consumer Reports Survey Form. As usual I am
> shocked by how little information they gather and dismayed by how
///snipped///

I gave up on CR years ago Ed. I am convinced (cant prove it) that they have
their reporting minds made up in advance and collect just enough data to
look good and use only those data that fit their preconception...I know this
will start a firestorm but that is my opinion.

DaveD

"Dave and Trudy" > wrote in message
...

>> Well I just got my 2008 Consumer Reports Survey Form. As usual I am
>> shocked by how little information they gather and dismayed by how
> ///snipped///
>
> I gave up on CR years ago Ed. I am convinced (cant prove it) that they
> have their reporting minds made up in advance and collect just enough data
> to look good and use only those data that fit their preconception...I know
> this will start a firestorm but that is my opinion.


They claim to be neutral in their "testing" and reports but down a whole
laundry list of products you can see where they were obviously PAID OFF by
some manufacturers. One of the BEST examples of that was that for MANY YEARS
the standard Hoover Vacuum was rated as their "best buy" when it was a
veritable piece of crap. They'd fall apart often within 6 months of
purchase. CR also rated the Kirby the "WORST" vacuum ever made. YET you
frequently see Kirbys that are 20, 50 or even 100 years old, still working
and still getting FAR MORE crap out of carpets that the whiz bang
computerized Hoovers you see in Target Stores, and again 6 months later you
have a bag of parts and are going back to Target for a NEW Hoover or Dyson
or whatever. No wonder they have a 30 day guarantee.

Oh and don't get me started on TOASTERS..........

The only thing they are close to being right about is the Honda. We have
3 of them. They are great cars. They couldn't very well attack them. BUT
they DO rate some others higher. Much of what you see is really slanted. CR
spares on amount of negative ink for American cars, particularly Chrysler
products that have been among the better cars on the road for the past
decade. Yeah they have made some stinkers. But FORD still owns the repair
shops, They are the mechanic's favorite cars. But did you ever notice that
the mechanics don't drive them themselves?

CR - CLAIMS not to be in the pocket of the manufacturers. OH BULL****!

" krp" > wrote in message
news:7RFKj.3620$3w2.1676@trnddc05...
>
> "Dave and Trudy" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>> Well I just got my 2008 Consumer Reports Survey Form. As usual I am
>>> shocked by how little information they gather and dismayed by how
>> ///snipped///
>>
>> I gave up on CR years ago Ed. I am convinced (cant prove it) that they
>> have their reporting minds made up in advance and collect just enough
>> data to look good and use only those data that fit their
>> preconception...I know this will start a firestorm but that is my
>> opinion.
>
>
> They claim to be neutral in their "testing" and reports but down a
> whole laundry list of products you can see where they were obviously PAID
> OFF by some manufacturers. One of the BEST examples of that was that for
> MANY YEARS the standard Hoover Vacuum was rated as their "best buy" when
> it was a veritable piece of crap. They'd fall apart often within 6 months
> of purchase. CR also rated the Kirby the "WORST" vacuum ever made. YET you
> frequently see Kirbys that are 20, 50 or even 100 years old, still working
> and still getting FAR MORE crap out of carpets that the whiz bang
> computerized Hoovers you see in Target Stores, and again 6 months later
> you have a bag of parts and are going back to Target for a NEW Hoover or
> Dyson or whatever. No wonder they have a 30 day guarantee.
>
> Oh and don't get me started on TOASTERS..........
>
> The only thing they are close to being right about is the Honda. We
> have 3 of them. They are great cars. They couldn't very well attack them.
> BUT they DO rate some others higher. Much of what you see is really
> slanted. CR spares on amount of negative ink for American cars,
> particularly Chrysler products that have been among the better cars on the
> road for the past decade. Yeah they have made some stinkers. But FORD
> still owns the repair shops, They are the mechanic's favorite cars. But
> did you ever notice that the mechanics don't drive them themselves?
>
> CR - CLAIMS not to be in the pocket of the manufacturers. OH BULL****!


Oh, come on. Perhaps a $60 Hoover doesn't last as long as a $1200 Kirby
vacuum, but for $1200 you can buy 20 Hoovers. (and not pay a healthy
portion of the sales price in salesman's commission.)
Glad YOU like Chrysler products....but it puts you in the minority of
buyers.

If you believe Fords are so bad why do the vast majority of fleets buy Ford
vehicles more than any other brand, including Toyota and Honda and have
continued to do so over and over again for years on end?

Corporate fleets unlike rental car companies keep their vehicles, like all
other tools used in their business, for fie years because of federal
corporate tax depredation laws. It is not uncommon to see corporate feet
vehicles with 300K on the clock still running fine

" krp" > wrote in message
news:7RFKj.3620$3w2.1676@trnddc05...
>
> "Dave and Trudy" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> The only thing they are close to being right about is the Honda. We
>> have
> 3 of them. They are great cars. They couldn't very well attack them. BUT
> they DO rate some others higher. Much of what you see is really slanted.
> CR spares on amount of negative ink for American cars, particularly
> Chrysler products that have been among the better cars on the road for the
> past decade. Yeah they have made some stinkers. But FORD still owns the
> repair shops, They are the mechanic's favorite cars. But did you ever
> notice that the mechanics don't drive them themselves?
>
> CR - CLAIMS not to be in the pocket of the manufacturers. OH BULL****!
>
>
>

krp wrote:
> But FORD still owns the repair shops, They are the
> mechanic's favorite cars. But did you ever notice that the mechanics
> don't drive them themselves?

What a load of nonsense. I have owned 4 Fords and they
all required near zero maintenance other than routine
wear items. My 2004 Ford F-150 is the best vehicle that
I have ever owned, and that is saying a lot when my
other vehicle is a Corvette that has only had major
repairs once. That was after about 10 years of driving
it, so that is real good.

"mack" > wrote in message
...

> Oh, come on. Perhaps a $60 Hoover doesn't last as long as a $1200 Kirby
> vacuum, but for $1200 you can buy 20 Hoovers. (and not pay a healthy
> portion of the sales price in salesman's commission.)
> Glad YOU like Chrysler products....but it puts you in the minority of
> buyers.

Oh come on yourself. IF you are sharp you can but that $1200 Kirby for
$800. And I don't know where you have seen those Hoovers lately but they are
running between $300 and $500 a copy today. And they last maybe 6 months. By
the time the 2nd one craps out the Kirby has paid for itself.

I know LOTS of people very happy with their Chryslers. Just don't get
one of the minivans with the Mitsubishi engine and trans units. SO long as
you have The Chrysler powerplant they are near indestructible. The 300 is
good wheels too. The 4 banger leaves a bit to be desired.

"Mike hunt" > wrote in message
...

> If you believe Fords are so bad why do the vast majority of fleets buy
> Ford vehicles more than any other brand, including Toyota and Honda and
> have continued to do so over and over again for years on end?

I worked for a company that had a fleet of Fords. On any given day 20%
of our fleet was in the shop. Actually Ford TRUCKS are pretty good. Their
CARS suck! The purchasing agents go with or for PRICE. Ford drops their
pants in fleet deals. But lots of fleet managers are not going back for Ford
any more.

"Mark Jones" > wrote in message
m...
> krp wrote:
>> But FORD still owns the repair shops, They are the
>> mechanic's favorite cars. But did you ever notice that the mechanics
>> don't drive them themselves?
>
> What a load of nonsense. I have owned 4 Fords and they
> all required near zero maintenance other than routine
> wear items. My 2004 Ford F-150 is the best vehicle that
> I have ever owned,

That's NOT a CAR it is a TRUCK. Ford builds a pretty okay TRUCK. BUT they
have lost market share to Japan and Company like mad in the mast 5 years.
Toyota is right on their rear with the Tundra. Nissan is coming up too.
Honda is back in the pack but starting to sell. Even Dodge has cut into Ford
sales especially in the south.

krp wrote:
> "Mark Jones" > wrote in message
> m...
>> krp wrote:
>>> But FORD still owns the repair shops, They are the
>>> mechanic's favorite cars. But did you ever notice that the mechanics
>>> don't drive them themselves?
>>
>> What a load of nonsense. I have owned 4 Fords and they
>> all required near zero maintenance other than routine
>> wear items. My 2004 Ford F-150 is the best vehicle that
>> I have ever owned,
>
> That's NOT a CAR it is a TRUCK. Ford builds a pretty okay TRUCK. BUT
> they have lost market share to Japan and Company like mad in the mast
> 5 years. Toyota is right on their rear with the Tundra. Nissan is
> coming up too. Honda is back in the pack but starting to sell. Even
> Dodge has cut into Ford sales especially in the south.

2 of the 4 vehicles were cars. My trucks will either be a Ford or
a Chevy/GMC.