Re: Minivan Comaprison

Wrong book, wrong person. Noah---->Ark-->Genesis. Moses--->Parting the Red Sea---->10 Commandments-->Exodus.

A hell of a lot more believable than some, not all, but some of the tripe that comes out of CR. Their loudspeaker ratings for one.

BTW what makes a person with such an obsession for foreign cars hang out in a domestic car newsgroup?

Just curious.

"CR is balanced" is a myth.

Prove that they don't.

As I've already explained, the people who agree with CR will likely keep subscribing. Those who don't, won't. People who like import cars will like CR's ratings and keep subscribing. People who disagree with their ratings based on their own personal experience are much more likely to drop their subscription. Can I "prove" this? No, but I think my argument is logical and that is about the only proof you can offer in a situation like this.

Which makes their data virtually useless to me as I keep my cars 9-15 years typically. My Honda Accord may have had slightly fewer problems in the first 5 years and 60,000 miles as compared to the Plymouth Acclaim that replaced it, but after that the Plymouth was far better than the Accord. So, for me, the CR data was completely misleading as it steered me to an Accord when, for me, an American car that is more durable over the long run was the better choice.

Read above.

Yes, but I care most about the total number of problems curing the duration I own the car. My Accord had so many problems between 60,000 and 90,000 miles (at which time I traded it for an Acclaim), that it was far more troublesome in total than my Acclaim was in 146,000 miles and nearly 10 years. When my Acclaim was totaled, it still had the original exhaust system, front brake rotors, and engine parts other than the water pump. The Accord required a valve-train replacement at 72,000 miles when the cam and all 16 rocker arms self-destructed. I had to replace the front rotors at 60,000 miles as they had rusted so badly they couldn't be turned. The struts were also shot at 60,000, whereas the Acclaim had 100,000 when I replaced its struts just 'cause I thought I should by then. The Accord had a water leak in the back window that the dealer never did get completely eliminated. The exhaust system was replaced at around 70,000 miles at a cost of around $800. I could go on.

You really have a hard time following logic. I own and drive cars, so reading a magazine that test drives cars is completely appropriate. If I didn't own or drive a car, then your statement above would make sense, but it is completely irrelevant.

Read a basic statistics text. I don't have the time to educate you here.

Not nearly as dumb as yours above. If you take a poll in a bar in Boston full of Red Sox fans and ask them who they think has the best pitching staff, the Sox or the Yankees, what answer do you expect? This is no different than asking a biased sample of car owners what they think of their cars.

I read CR every month. Do you always resort to name calling when you are losing an argument? The above statement, which is completely false, really shows your lack of credibility.

Matt

Iguess we can deduce from your insult that he's got you, and that you have no argument.

I'm guessing brain damage, but that is only a guess.

Matt

There's no need to call attention to yourself. We all know that ou're going to post something stupid.

The Sienna is not an American car. Even if you think it is it is irrelevant to the isssue of bias we are discussing.

The Accord is not an American car either. Even if you think it is it is irrelevant to the isssue of bias we are discussing.

Why?

I, at one point in time in the past, faithfully subscribed to and read CR, but I cancelled my subscription after three years because of their continued bias against US cars. I claim there was, is, and always will be, bias against what is perceived nowadays to be a US car. So, because I do not, AT PRESENT, read CR, an most likely never will again, does that mean I cannot claim bias because I "DON'T read CR"?

Of course not. Closer than CNN, of course.

Well, yeah. Once I got disgusted with them, I quit reading.

And you are a case of a doofus defending CR without even bothering to read the criticisism of it.

Lloyd, I feel so sorry for you. Your arguments are like kids banging metal spoons on pots, noisy, repetitive, and single-minded. I pity you because your brain has never exercised itself by actually responding with reason to a logical argument, and instead just re-runs over it's gutted cart-tracks, over and over. Honestly, Lloyd, there really is a better way to live.

So now, the journalist that wrote the USA Today article that says CR takes doctored cars is a doofus. I guess that means that USA Today is a rag in your eyes.

I suppose that this leads to Lloyd's Law: Anyone or anything that criticizes Consumer Reports magazine is stupid. The response to any logical argument to the contrary is to see the first sentence.

Ted

What makes one (i.e., you) so biased against one type of car that he cannot be honest and objective?

Prove aliens aren't among us.

So how does CR get reliability data for domestic cars? A lot of its readers obviously own them.

Yeah, I could just issue attacks on a group without any substantiation or without ever reading their publication, and then dare others to disprove what I say.

Define "American" then. Why is an Intrepid made in Canada by a German-owned company American and an Accord made in Ohio by a Japanese-owned company not?

So is Car & Driver biased against American cars when they rank Accord over Stratus and Taurus? Is the whole world biased when they don't agree with you?

Try reading Al Franken's book.

I see. So someone who switched from MD-DOS to Apple back in the 1980s is still qualified to critique Windows?