At least the article admits CR's ranking metrics, which are hardly statistically valid.
8 cars lose CR recommendation
8 cars lose CR recommendation
More Consumer Reports nonsense, IMO
- Thread starter JeffKeryk
- Start date
"Based on our 2024 Auto Survey of CR members"
Of course that would pander to their base by taking their own member feedback. Oh well, I don't buy cars based on one single source of information anyways. Interesting article, nonetheless, about what vehicles they're talking about.
This has always been the case with CR - its a simple survey, and why CR results are regularly dismissed here.
In statistics, a captured survey group is verboten unless it specifically is considered with how that group uses that product.
Using past brand results because they have small numbers is mixing apples and oranges.
Their definition of reliability is incorrect; panel gaps, etc. have nothing to do with the probability that a product will perform its intended function adequately.
My career was in predictive analytics; I've been beaten up by the best when reporting results I could not fully explain or back up. Specifics tell the story far beyond the raw numbers. Always challenge the numbers objectively.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2024
- Messages
- 224
I agree. Reliabilty ratings on vehicles that close to new are pretty much worthless to me. Pretty much any vehicle is gonna be reliable for the first couple of years at least. Someone writing that their 1 year old car never broke down doesn't tell you much about anything reliabilty related.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2016
- Messages
- 713
And now we're all about decision-based evidence-making
It's extremely difficult for the layperson. I will read a peer reviewed research article to an adequate level of satisfaction, then my better stats educated coworker will tell me about all of the mistakes he found.
I have a buddy who buys only Chevrolet’s and typically buys them in the first year of their generation/redesign. He is currently on his 4th EQUINOX and has had no issues with any of them. And I personally think(in my experience) the Equinox’s drive better than their competitors including the CR-V & CX5.
Before that my buddy had VENTURE minivans. And before that, he’s had too many Chevy’s to list including vehicles during the malaise era.
I typically buy Japanese vehicles (and get this) in the 3rd model year of a specific generation when the bugs should be gone, and have had more issues in the past 40 years than my Chevy driving buddy.
We’ve had Honda, Mazda, Nissan & Toyota/Lexus and though none were disastrous…would you like to know which of them has been the most reliable in a 11-15+ years of ownership? Actually the LEXUS was disappointing. And at least 50% of my Japanese vehicles came from Japan and these were the most problematic. But still better than my personal experiences with domestic vehicles.
SURPRISE!
Nissan vehicles have been the least problematic for us including their CVTs…What does this tell us?
Before that my buddy had VENTURE minivans. And before that, he’s had too many Chevy’s to list including vehicles during the malaise era.
I typically buy Japanese vehicles (and get this) in the 3rd model year of a specific generation when the bugs should be gone, and have had more issues in the past 40 years than my Chevy driving buddy.
We’ve had Honda, Mazda, Nissan & Toyota/Lexus and though none were disastrous…would you like to know which of them has been the most reliable in a 11-15+ years of ownership? Actually the LEXUS was disappointing. And at least 50% of my Japanese vehicles came from Japan and these were the most problematic. But still better than my personal experiences with domestic vehicles.
SURPRISE!
Nissan vehicles have been the least problematic for us including their CVTs…What does this tell us?
Last edited:
I wish all those complaining about Consumer Reports would put up a viable source of user reviews on the scale that they can.
But nothing but crickets. Im sure forums are more scientific with its tiny of percentage of people who own the vehicles. *LOL*
But nothing but crickets. Im sure forums are more scientific with its tiny of percentage of people who own the vehicles. *LOL*
Last edited:
Good to hear, my wife bought a 2025 Equinox last month. Good news is it did way better in Consumer Reports that the VW Tiguan which we were on our way to look at, but stopped at the Chevy dealer on the way to check out the new Equinox EV, then she saw the new remodeled 2025 gas version and fell in love with it. I cant really blame her either.
I have a 2017 Traverse and nothing I think comes close in price and towing our boat with a tow rating of 5,100 lbs. Plus it's super quiet and comfortable.
I looked and Equinox came out in 2005? So he's owned 4 in 20 years. 6 year ownership term? 5?
Ya but his data is old
CR is OK for what it is; it is hard to get objective data. All I am saying is, CR does not report statistically valid results.
So take it for what it's worth.
I don't have a bird cage.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Family member gets a Traverse every 3 years on lease and just drives and sells properties - latest is darn nice. Sister and BiL just traded a trouble free Saturn on a nice Buick Enclave - I don’t let the drama here effect my purchases either - see signature …
CR is one source of information, as are R&T/C&D/MT, forums, your local indy shop as well as friends and family experiences. All of which will have some value and none of which are the one version of the truth. That said, CR has extensive testing facilities and in contrast to some others is transparent about their methodologies, populations and sampling, with the understanding that their population is somewhat self selecting.
We will weight CR's opinions heavily on appliances, TV's, etc., and read their auto reviews with interest but they usually won't significantly impact a decision.
We will weight CR's opinions heavily on appliances, TV's, etc., and read their auto reviews with interest but they usually won't significantly impact a decision.
This is for predicted reliability? I would like to see your math and logic that says its not?
How else would you do it?
Car makers are pretty consistent in the manufacturing standards, and parts quality in my limited experience. My two Focus wagons have had nearly all the same problems nearly the same mileage intervals. The good parts have been good, and the bad parts have been bad in both.
Also for CR, a relatively small sample size usually represents a population fairly well. And a vehicle's reliability isn't really effected by the owners until it gets into the 7+ year range? So a couple hundred people reporting problems on a vehicle model year, should give a very accurate picture of what that model year problem spots are. I think that CR should give confidence intervals based on the sample size, and state where they used which assumptions if the sample size isn't statistically valid alone.
I think the tendency to dumb down information for the general public, and not have the math, process for making assumptions, and data available as well, makes people distrust the experts. Not just in CR but with almost anything were information is filtered/interpreted by experts. Give the Cole's notes for people who are fine with 1 paragraph or a list, and then the data and methodology for those who want to dig deeper.
Similar threads
