f355spider
$50 Site Donor 2025
Read the article...it lists some of the factors CR uses...
Last edited:
Consumer reports 5 worst car brands.
- Thread starter Vercingetorix
- Start date
f355spider
$50 Site Donor 2025
Why didn't CR have to pay damages to Izuzu or Suzuki?
A good question for the courts.
f355spider
$50 Site Donor 2025
Because the car manufacturers could not prove financial or reputational harm?
We bought a used Mini several years ago just for fun and after I bought it I checked out CR’s online reliability information. I saw that the HVAC system was supposedly unreliable so I read some of the owner comments. One person stated that the heater didn’t work well so he took it to a dealer and was told “They are all like that.” In that case the defective item resided between the service writer’s ears.
Having been in an old Suzuki Samurai with 4 people hustled around some corners in the city, it is definitely the tipsiest vehicle I've ever been in... A 2 door wrangler feels like its hugging the ground in the corners compared to that Samurai...
In the video, its amazing how well the shocks keep it from catapulting itself onto its side in the transitions, and it does perform pretty well, but in the real world with uneven pavement, gravel shoulders, 80k miles on the shocks and a few people in it, it is certainly going to tip over far more easily than most SUV's, even in that time period.
I think what the CR guys realized, is that their standard test wasn't going to show how easily a Samurai could end up on its side in real life, and probably should've just did their regular test, and say it passes, but, here it is in other common situations where its going to tip over much more easily than anything else on the road.... Be aware of how high the CoG is going to get with 600lbs in it, and you better keep good shocks on it...
The article I linked laid it out in summary. If you really care, you can find the actual case files and read through the rulings.
They’re the same ones to be “oh it’s just an evap code, that’s fine!” but if it were an American brand they’d be all over the internet screaming their 150k vehicle has an evap leak and what junk it is
I remember when they rated the badge engineered VW Routan significantly higher than its Grand Caravan and T&C siblings. CR just quietly swept it under the rug and in later years they were right neck and neck with each other.
SammyChevelleTypeS3
$50 site donor 2023
I have heard quite a few . Even made up a few good ones myself to describe something a vehicle was doing.Never heard the "drives like an apartment bldg. on wheels!"
Thanks gonna pass on Pilot
I must be a glutton for punishment. I own two Jaguars. The 2017 F-Type has been a spectacular car. It does have a few known plastic cooling pipe issues which I should address before too much time passes. The aluminum replacement pipes solve the problems and should prevent unnecessary coolant loss.
nope jeep has even went further down hill since Stellantis bought it..I am on jeep number 5 and each successive owner has gotten worse...my 2024 rubicon has given me more down time due to shortage of warranty parts than the previous 4 together......Stellantis has also been voted the worst company to deal with for suppliers of auto parts..
My view of CR is that they are best at reviews and critiques of appliances and similar, and are probably one of the better resources for those who purchase vehicles as appliances. Are they perfect? No, no single source is, but given their methodology CR are probably close to as good as one gets for easily available and digestible data based on real world experience. Granted that experience is by a self-selected population. I will say having seen their testing facility in CT, it is impressive.
That being said, most of what we own and have owned is at or near the bottom of their lists and we don't care. We purchase what we like based on what we prioritize, but do read CR and other sources for current trends on problems, etc. We are also enthusiasts and probably not CR's core automotive reader base....but their info is very helpful with TV's!
That being said, most of what we own and have owned is at or near the bottom of their lists and we don't care. We purchase what we like based on what we prioritize, but do read CR and other sources for current trends on problems, etc. We are also enthusiasts and probably not CR's core automotive reader base....but their info is very helpful with TV's!
true. several years ago I was hiking and i had a Moab hat on and i met another person on the trail and he saw my hat and asked me if I go to Moab and i said I did...he ask why and I said to jeep...he proceeded to to tell me that the Subaru forester was in his opinion the best offroad vehicle currently (it was around 2017 or so). I told him that probably was not suited for what I do and he told me I would be surprised how capable it was and that he tested them all. He then told me he was a vehicle tester for CR...I just said "interesting"...
f355spider
$50 Site Donor 2025
I've read articles, summaries and the Wikipedia synopsis, and never really found a clear answer. If there was clear harm, and fraudulent testing, then there should be damages to be recovered for the harm.
The photo manager at the local UPI bureau I worked at had one around 91 or 92...I rode in it often. Other than being a loud, uncomfortable and crude transportation, it never felt unsafe.
From Wikipedia:
Suzuki sued for $60 million in damages and unspecified punitive damages for what Suzuki claimed was willfully fraudulent testing. After an 8-year legal battle, CU and Suzuki settled out of court through mutual consent in 2004.
Settlement
In the settlement, CR agreed that it "never intended to imply that the Samurai easily rolls over in routine driving conditions." A joint announcement of the settlement stated that "CU and Suzuki disagree with respect to the validity" of CU's tests. "Suzuki disputes the validity" of the tests, and "CU stands by its test protocol and findings."According to CU, Suzuki internal documents indicate that the company was aware of the Samurai’s rollover problem. A Suzuki memorandum dated July 14, 1985, stated: "It is imperative that we develop a crisis plan that will primarily deal with the ‘roll’ factor. Because of the narrow wheelbase, similar to the Jeep, the car is bound to turn over."Over the years, over 200 Suzuki Samurai rollover lawsuits have been settled, and Suzuki's own expert witnesses testified the automaker was aware of 213 deaths and 8,200 injuries involving Suzuki Samurai rollovers.
I’ve never look at consumer reports before purchasing something. In general people are horrible about self reporting and compartmentalizing issues. How do you weed out the guy who thinks his favorite brand can do no wrong or the Karen who just likes to complain to complain?
Go look at a review of a product on Walmart or Amazon and you’ll find people will give it one star because shipping company put it on their neighbors doorstep, and the neighbor took it. What the heck does that have to do with the quality of the toaster you bought? And then you’ll also find the five star review guy who says he’s been using XYZ product for 50 years and has their logo tattooed on his backside.
Neither of those folks should be taken seriously IMO.
Go look at a review of a product on Walmart or Amazon and you’ll find people will give it one star because shipping company put it on their neighbors doorstep, and the neighbor took it. What the heck does that have to do with the quality of the toaster you bought? And then you’ll also find the five star review guy who says he’s been using XYZ product for 50 years and has their logo tattooed on his backside.
Neither of those folks should be taken seriously IMO.
Small sample size, but out 2017 Crosstrek seemed more robust than our '23
Wonder who much of this was the ridiculously low 20-23 psig cold tire pressure rec on the door placard.
We had a few of thes through the years, never came close to rolling one but didn't drive it like a Lotus Elan with two drunk fat bros high in the back.
They discovered a dangerous wheel lift tendency and explored it.
Nothing hack or biased about it.
CR had nothing to push other than their concern for the safety of buyers of these vehicles.
That sounds nice.
But what they actually did, if you read is that the vehicles performed just fine in the standard test they had used from the beginning. But they wanted to achieve a result. So they altered the standard testing procedure they had historically used for those two specific vehicles, so they could achieve the 'result' they wanted to 'report'.
You can call it what you want, but that describes disingenuous, biased, hack journalism to me.
For the record, I've never owned an Isuzu trooper, or Suzuki Samurai, nor did I have a vested interest in either brand.
Similar threads
- Locked
