Say what you want about their rating system, but one thing CR doesn't do is accept advertising, money, or influence from the manufacturers. They don't even accept the cars for free: they buy them anonymously off the lot like you and I do.
Prius comes in 4th .
- Thread starter g20ooh
- Start date
- Status
Say what you want about their rating system, but one thing CR doesn't do is accept advertising, money, or influence from the manufacturers. They don't even accept the cars for free: they buy them anonymously off the lot like you and I do.
Well, they must have some super-secret cult like testing methods then. Somehow, for 2005, the Chevrolet Monte Carlo (I own a redesigned 2006, but trust me, I did not buy it for this reason) made the list of cars with "excellent" reliability. It was one of two domestic cars to do so, the other the Mercury Mariner. Explain, then, how the Impala, which is based on the exact same platform, and with the exception of interior trim and exterior body panels, and is the essentially the exact same car, did not manage to make this list. I could even argue that the Grand Prix should have scored well, as well, it utilizes a similar but updated platform.
This makes as much sense as rating an Accord coupe as "excellent" and the sedan as "poor".
This alone demonstrates how backwards (and biased) Consumer Reports methods are, and I don't care what they say to show otherwise.
This makes as much sense as rating an Accord coupe as "excellent" and the sedan as "poor".
This alone demonstrates how backwards (and biased) Consumer Reports methods are, and I don't care what they say to show otherwise.
hybrid? Plenty of non-hybrids now have nav screens -- so you'd expect Chevrolet or Ford to replace a nav screen out of warranty?
POLK you seem to be overlooking one major difference.
If a nav. screen fails on a ford or chevy you can drive it because it was not needed in the first place.
If you did replace one it would not cost $6000.00
I doubt that you will keep your car long enough to find out but if you do it will be interesting to see what you think about it in another 10 years.
And Black Bart, you seem to be overlooking that if you want, you can drive a Prius without the screen too. Sure, you'd lose EASY control of climate control and stereo, but you could still operate those systems effectively via the steering wheel controls, without screen. Heck, the car has an option that some use frequently to turn the screen completely OFF to minimize its distraction factor. Car runs fine in "blackout" mode. Personally, I only rarely look at the climate or audio screens, and operate both systems just fine from the wheel.
And if your Prius screen does fail, you don't have to spend $6k to get another (another anti-Prius propaganda myth, along with $8k batteries. . .
). Mine actually has an ugly vertical scratch on it (previous owner, shame on me for missing it before I bought...). Anyway, long story short, you can have a refurb unit for under $500. I don't actually recall what they quoted me for a new unit, but since fully functional refurbs are available, I'm not worried about it.
By contrast, when I owned a 98 Regal GS, and it's rinky-dink green VF climate control display actually did go out. That little display, much smaller and much more primitive than anyone's nav screen, was almost $800 new, with yard prices between $400-500.
So, you somehow think Toyota has an exclusive lock on overcharging customers for critical parts? Hardly.
As to longevity, I'll probably drive the car to high miles long before I reach some long time-span, such as 10 years. I will probably have it over 100k miles in the next two years. Time will tell, but so far, I'm very happy.
And if your Prius screen does fail, you don't have to spend $6k to get another (another anti-Prius propaganda myth, along with $8k batteries. . .
By contrast, when I owned a 98 Regal GS, and it's rinky-dink green VF climate control display actually did go out. That little display, much smaller and much more primitive than anyone's nav screen, was almost $800 new, with yard prices between $400-500.
So, you somehow think Toyota has an exclusive lock on overcharging customers for critical parts? Hardly.
As to longevity, I'll probably drive the car to high miles long before I reach some long time-span, such as 10 years. I will probably have it over 100k miles in the next two years. Time will tell, but so far, I'm very happy.
Colonel Polk takes these shots at the Prius seriously. A couple of Saturday nights ago, I went to a shopping strip area with the wife, I was amazed at the number of Priuses that were out that night.
These guys were just sticking it in my face that they weren't using gasoline. They didn't say it, but I know what was going on!
These guys were just sticking it in my face that they weren't using gasoline. They didn't say it, but I know what was going on!
First, all I said was that they don't accept advertising or free demo vehicles from manufacturers. I wasn't talking about their rating system...just refuting your claim that they were selling their ratings to the highest bidder. That is patently false.
Second, as for the ratings on the Accord, I assume you used the Honda analogy as an example, not as an actual rating. Because all the Accords were rated excellent.
Third, I'm not sure where you're getting your ratings information about the Monte Carlo and the Impala. But I'm a subscriber to CR, and I looked them both up based on your complaint above. The '05 Monte Carlo that you mention doesn't show a reliability rating. The last year they have for it was '04, and it was rated very good or excellent in everything except braking, with a better than average used car verdict. The Impala V6 has also been rated very good to excellent in everything but brakes from '04 to '06 (except Suspension in '04 was only "fair"). Looks to me like it was rated pretty good, too. Not sure where you're getting your data, or which list you're referring to. But what I'm getting from CR doesn't line up with your assertions.
Finally, all the reliability data they collect and publish comes from subscribers who self-report. So at least for reliability and a couple of other categories, it's the owners who rate them, not CR. They just report it. Explain to me how that is "backward" and "biased".
Well, first I must admit my mistake, I rechecked the information, and it looks like that the 2005 Monte Carlo had a best "predicted" reliability rating, rather than an actual reliability rating, information which can be seen here:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/AUTOS/10/26/cr_most_reliable/index.html
or
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/cr_car_reliability.html
I originally saw this information in a CR Used Car buyers guide handbook that I flipped through while in the bookstore, it had been a while, so maybe I got the facts a little backwards.
Regardless of what the ratings or predicted ratings say, I just don't see their ratings as fair or well balanced. This is especially true if they're assimilating them purely from owners who are subscribers who self-report. It's very possible (and in my opinion quite probable) that they attract owners of Japanese models and receive a disproportionate amount of positive reviews for such cars. In my experience most Japanese cars are really just not that much more or less reliable than comparable American or European counterparts. I've had a friend with a Civic that was falling apart and having suspension failures before 30K miles, and another with a Pontiac Grand Am, known for a not-so-great suspension, that is driving flawlessly at 50K miles. One person has two consecutive Toyota engines catastrophically fail at approximately 103K miles, another drives a Ford Probe well past 200K (with the original Ford engine, not the redesigned Mazda-derived engine). Another friend with a Regal, nothing but problems; another has a Scion, he loves it.
I just don't see imports as *that* much better than American cars, and IMO, Consumer Reports paints a painfully skewed picture in favor of import makers.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/AUTOS/10/26/cr_most_reliable/index.html
or
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/cr_car_reliability.html
I originally saw this information in a CR Used Car buyers guide handbook that I flipped through while in the bookstore, it had been a while, so maybe I got the facts a little backwards.
Regardless of what the ratings or predicted ratings say, I just don't see their ratings as fair or well balanced. This is especially true if they're assimilating them purely from owners who are subscribers who self-report. It's very possible (and in my opinion quite probable) that they attract owners of Japanese models and receive a disproportionate amount of positive reviews for such cars. In my experience most Japanese cars are really just not that much more or less reliable than comparable American or European counterparts. I've had a friend with a Civic that was falling apart and having suspension failures before 30K miles, and another with a Pontiac Grand Am, known for a not-so-great suspension, that is driving flawlessly at 50K miles. One person has two consecutive Toyota engines catastrophically fail at approximately 103K miles, another drives a Ford Probe well past 200K (with the original Ford engine, not the redesigned Mazda-derived engine). Another friend with a Regal, nothing but problems; another has a Scion, he loves it.
I just don't see imports as *that* much better than American cars, and IMO, Consumer Reports paints a painfully skewed picture in favor of import makers.
Hmmm...not sure what the demographics of the CR subscribers are. I don't know if there are more or less import owners. But I know they've been accused of having a bias or slant to the imports, though I don't see how on the reliability side if it's self-reported.
I do agree that the gap has greatly closed between domestics and imports. I think the relative differences are almost statistically insignificant in many cases even where one is rated over another. A lot of it is simply the domestics paying for sins of the past. It's getting better...IMHO.
I do agree that the gap has greatly closed between domestics and imports. I think the relative differences are almost statistically insignificant in many cases even where one is rated over another. A lot of it is simply the domestics paying for sins of the past. It's getting better...IMHO.
JHZR2
Staff member
Toyota is just getting bit with what has been the reason why MB and other luxury makes are considered so unreliable these days - a far shot from the days of simple old 300Ds and camrys.
The reason is electronic technology. In a lot of ways it makes things better and very nice... but should one really consider an LCD screen to last for all that long given thermal cycles, backlights dimming, etc? Should one really consider advanced control systems to keep working 100% after 8 or 10 years, when they are 2-3x more complex than a standard typical vehicle of the day?
High-tech equals poor longevity, regardless of OEM, and regardless of what kind of a part it is. It is more excusable in a $25k toyota than a $75k MB, because of the price paid to purchase, but it is the same principle, and it is to be expected.
If you cant afford to play, stay out of the arena.
JMH
The reason is electronic technology. In a lot of ways it makes things better and very nice... but should one really consider an LCD screen to last for all that long given thermal cycles, backlights dimming, etc? Should one really consider advanced control systems to keep working 100% after 8 or 10 years, when they are 2-3x more complex than a standard typical vehicle of the day?
High-tech equals poor longevity, regardless of OEM, and regardless of what kind of a part it is. It is more excusable in a $25k toyota than a $75k MB, because of the price paid to purchase, but it is the same principle, and it is to be expected.
If you cant afford to play, stay out of the arena.
JMH
- Status
