Japanese automakers dominate Consumer Reports survey

that is really shockingly bad grades for GM (chrysler not so much of a shock)- but the reliability index is curious, is that reliability meaning the parts that are failing or is it the design that leads to failure or is it poor assembly of the components ?

That's ONE opinion but apparently American buyers do not agree with that ONE opinion of only 80 vehicles, since they still buy more GM vehicles and far more Ford F150s than the Chevrolet Avalanche LOL

No it was whatever they thought it might be LOL

that is really shockingly bad grades for GM (chrysler not so much of a shock)- but the reliability index is curious, is that reliability meaning the parts that are failing or is it the design that leads to failure or is it poor assembly of the components ?

Heh - that's why I like it. It is unique!

nah, that's not a good answer, it is a serious question- I guess no one from gm really cares what people might be asking when talking about them

Myself and others have dismissed the CR beauty poll as worhtless for years. It has to be one of these least statistically sound surveys that people actually pay attention to. It is about as valuable as asking a group of Republicans if they think Obama is doing a good job.

Poorly formed questions. Little actual data gathered. A self selected and biased group. yada, yada, yada. Mostly the survey results parrot the editiorial opinions of the CR auto staff. Interesting - yes. Statistically significant - no.

Ed

I have mixed feelings about them. Supposedly these ratings are based in owner reports. Maybe it is better than nothing.

I have always said that I dont really care what buyers say right after they get the car. I want to know how they hold up as they age. Many of us refuse to trade cars every 3-4 years.

This alone should be a clue to worthlesness of the survey. While the Avalanche may be a terrific Urban Assault Vehicle, or a terror weapon, it is a horrible pick-up truck - at least for people that actually need a pick-up truck for something other than riding around wtih an empty bed. The Avalanche is actually a reduced function Suburban. It truly qualifies as a Stupid Urban Vehicle. Only vehicle even close in term of uselessness is the Ridgeline. I suppose if you tow a boat and want an open bed to haul your gas cans, either is OK. But they are not pick-up trucks meant for people that need pick-up trucks. Most of the Avalanches I see hae hard tonneau covers over the bed....which means that they are especailly useless.

Ed

I pay almost no attention to what the critics say about new cars. Bill Maher -- love him or hate him -- had this to say about critics: "Yeah, listen to the music critics. The surest way to have a shitty (music) album collection is to buy what the critics recommend." Same with movies: We've ALL gone to see a movie that the critics raved about -- and we thought it sucked. Think of the neighborhood dorkwad who listens to music you hate, is really into movies you think are lame, drives a dorkwagon car you wouldn't be caught dead in but he's all proud of it... That guy is probably a professional critic of some kind. I submit that maybe the critics are a bunch of snooty snobs you wouldn't want to hang out with, who have a collection of shitty music, movies, and cars -- all of which they think is better than yours (but it isn't)... and they look down on you for it. Plus, they voted the Miata "most fun to drive" -- read: "Most Gay." I'm just sayin'... ;-)

Your reply does make sense - however others have posted when they bought cars CR trashed to have experienced dissatisfaction with those vehicles and then being happy with a car CR gave high marks. So, understandibly, especially given variations in statistical process control the volume of cars made compared to the actual number tested leads to a very large gap in terms of reliable sampling. Still, I think a useful component would be to indicate where the reliability failure occured, design, parts or assembled components. I think some information in that vein would go a long way to determining if the car company has a future or not. Parts might be made of poor qulity materials; or the assembly was poorly done causing ill fit and interference or the design demanded more than the material propeties could provide- and since there is so much cross component/platform/ design mix in the industry a specific problem could affect more than one vehicle. the rollover/ handling problem that was identified with suvs is an example.

not that there's anything wrong with it, eh ?

people have to start somewhere when purchasing a vehicle- can't go around just looking at the fancy commercials on tv as a guide

Ed, you sure are full of wind and piss today. The Avalanche is a very nice looking truck, and is much more of a truck then most of the import "trucks". At least it isn't built on a **cking car chassis.

I pay almost no attention to what the critics say about new cars. =EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD Bill Maher -- love him or hate him -- had this to say about critics: "Yeah, listen to the music critics. =EF=BF=BDThe surest way to have a shitty (music) album collection is to buy what the critics recommend." =EF=BF=BDSame with movies: We've ALL gone to see a movie that the critics raved about -- and we thought it sucked. =EF=BF=BD Think of the neighborhood dorkwad who listens to music you hate, is really into movies you think are lame, drives a dorkwagon car you wouldn't be caught dead in but he's all proud of it... =EF=BF=BD That guy is probably a professional critic of some kind. =EF=BF=BD I submit that maybe the critics are a bunch of snooty snobs you wouldn't want to hang out with, who have a collection of shitty music, movies, and cars -- all of which they think is better than yours =EF=BF=BD(but it isn't)... =EF=BF=BDand they look down on you for it. =EF=BF=BD Plus, they voted the Miata "most fun to drive" -- read: "Most Gay." =EF=BF=BD I'm just sayin'... =EF=BF=BD;-) ******************************************* raamman wrote: "not that there's anything wrong with it, eh ? people have to start somewhere when purchasing a vehicle- can't go around just looking at the fancy commercials on tv as a guide." ******************************************** Point taken -- but what makes CR a viable starting point? As i stated above, much of their ratings are subjective -- just like the ratings of music, movies, food... you name it. If the Food Editor in the NY Times says a certain restaurant serves the best food -- but your neighbor ate there and says it's lousy... you aren't going to go there -- even though the 'expert' at the newspaper said you should. You wouldn't give a second thought to putting the opinion of your neighbor above the 'expert.' I read CR on occasion as well -- and it's interesting -- but don't put a lot of credence in what they say. But it's still just an opinion, which they are paid to generate, on a deadline.