SVX Network Forums Live Chat! SVX or Subaru Links Old Lockers Photo Post How-To Documents Message Archive SVX Shop Search |
IRC users: |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Consumerreports.org is biased!?!?
Seems like consumerreports.org is biased on rating autos. For example while I was looking at 2007 Subaru Forester, they gave 71 points on their 100 point scale while they gave 83 for 2007 Toyota Rav4 (Limited V6). They both are rated same in three of their four testing categories while in the acceleration category, Forester is given Good while Rav4 is given Excellent. I dont think this is fair for them to use a base model Forester (2.5 X) and suggest a Limited edition (V6 model) Rav4 as an alternative. Now this 71 point rating for Forester reflects for the whole trim levels. I wonder how much a base model Rav4 scores .
I have also seen a crash test video of 2006 legacy sedan where they are comparing it with a Rav4 and concluding that Rav4 is more safer than Legacy in a side impact (ofcourse it should be since its a suv compared to a legacy sedan which stays low to the ground). -Pavan. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Consumer Reports magazine has always awarded the Forester (and most other Subarus) with glowing reviews, calling it the best small SUV on the road for a number of years. Now, thought, they've handed that honor back to the Rav, with the Forester second (last time I noticed). Lofty praise in view of all the models available.
I think you'll have to look long and hard to find a consumer product testing organization more even-handed than Consumers Union. dcb |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
-Pavan. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Perhaps they base it on pricing? Subaru's are not cheap cars, maybe a base Forester is in the same price league as a top end RAV4.
__________________
Chris 92 Ebony Mica LS-L "A Rolling Restoration": 223,250 KM - Sleeping 2007 STi 6MT, Stance GR+ coilovers, PWR Rad, JDM hood badge, svxfiles 6000K HIDs, JDM Clear Corners, $15/15 min mod, $20/20 min mod, Energy Swaybar Bushings, Hella Supertones horns, Gold STi BBS rims, Group A lightweight crank pulley, A/C system removed, Custom header-back exhaust, Hybrid carbon/metal rear sway bar, restored headlights with CCFL halos 2008 Subaru Legacy Spec B - Diamond Grey Metallic - Sold 2020 Ram 1500 Longhorn - Red Pearl |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Subaru Forester 2.5X - $21,195 (Expert Rating - 7.0, User Rating - 9.6) -Pavan. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I have noticed some odd ratings on other cars also. I just ignore the rating and read the reviews. I have found that the review is better then the score makes it out to be
Pava- I like the Q. When will you get it? As you can tell I am also an Alfa Nut.
__________________
1992 SVX LS-L 77,000 Miles 1983 Alfa Romeo Gtv6 1990 Alfa Romeo Spider 1973 TVR 2500M |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Duh? They have been like that for a long time, what bothers me is theit "Hollier than thou" 'tude. I have heard so many claims that they are better than other magazines because they don't accept $$$ from car makers for ads... They still want to cause a fuss to get their name in the news...
__________________
.Karl. Southwest members, click here to check in!CA,NV,AZ,UT,NM,OR,CO Wanted...your busted SVX! Watch out Earl, I'm comin to getchya Return of the Pissed Platypus! X2 My dream (other than a pearlie) 1.8 SVXi and a laguna blue spoiler...somewhere I decided to quit drinking, but I didn't like it so I quit not drinking. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Chris SVX World Network Administrator -1993 Subaru SVX LS-L, Barcelona Red, #46, 160,000+ Miles (Sold to SomethingElse) -2011 Toyota Sienna SE, Black, 30,000+ Miles (Swagger Wagon ) -2002 BMW R 1150R ABS, Black, 26,000+ Miles (Daily Driver ) SVX Owner from February 1997 to March 2008 SVX Online Community Member since February 1998 SVX World Network Member since February 2002, Member #520 Life is a game. Play to win. The world belongs to those who can laugh at it. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Did you ever consider that the RAV4 local availabilty wasn't the same as the Forester? Remember they buy their cars off the lot for retail price rather than "borrowing" test cars from the manufacturers?
Also you need to remember that the Forester platform is getting quite long in the tooth (dating back as far as 93 for its basic structure as it was borrowed from the Imp). The RAV4 is what 3 years old at most now? That does come into play concerning ratings. Remember science is only as good as the scientists conducting the test. Car testing is very subjective. One car might do something good at 35mph but suck at 40mph. Some people don't mind the sound of a pushrod engine in their car and others do, a few years back Old Mud was the best beer tested, etc... They're both recommended vehicles (as of 06 at least since I haven't read the 07 ratings), they both perform well in crash testing, they both have a above average rating for reliability etc so that's what you should get out of it not one is better than the other. Personally, if I was going cross country with 3 kids in the back seat I wouldn't want the Forester over the RAV4!
__________________
British vehicles are my last ditch attempt to keep the nasty Italian thoughts in my mind at bay. So far its working. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I personally don't like the Forester for long distances, the seats are too firm and my @ss goes numb after a while.
__________________
Chris 92 Ebony Mica LS-L "A Rolling Restoration": 223,250 KM - Sleeping 2007 STi 6MT, Stance GR+ coilovers, PWR Rad, JDM hood badge, svxfiles 6000K HIDs, JDM Clear Corners, $15/15 min mod, $20/20 min mod, Energy Swaybar Bushings, Hella Supertones horns, Gold STi BBS rims, Group A lightweight crank pulley, A/C system removed, Custom header-back exhaust, Hybrid carbon/metal rear sway bar, restored headlights with CCFL halos 2008 Subaru Legacy Spec B - Diamond Grey Metallic - Sold 2020 Ram 1500 Longhorn - Red Pearl |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
This is nothing new. There essentially is no "un-biased" auto reviewer in existence. Organizations like CR do not accept money for ads, true, but they do accept money, and if you look into their parent organization, Consumers Union, you'll find some familiar names on their list of contributors.
I do agree with the guy who said (in this thread) that they read the review and ignore the score. Since reviews are highly subjective and almost all categories outside of performance are subjective from the start, the best way to get real info out of any review is to just read it and skip over the scores. That way you can pick out the facts you are looking for and ignore the comments from the reviewer that the interior color was not pleasing to him or that the hood panel gap was 1mm bigger than he thinks it should be. I have to ask about this though... Quote:
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Chris SVX World Network Administrator -1993 Subaru SVX LS-L, Barcelona Red, #46, 160,000+ Miles (Sold to SomethingElse) -2011 Toyota Sienna SE, Black, 30,000+ Miles (Swagger Wagon ) -2002 BMW R 1150R ABS, Black, 26,000+ Miles (Daily Driver ) SVX Owner from February 1997 to March 2008 SVX Online Community Member since February 1998 SVX World Network Member since February 2002, Member #520 Life is a game. Play to win. The world belongs to those who can laugh at it. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Consumer reports should only be used for toliet paper, never reading materal.
If you watch the news you probabley heard about thier latest travesty of a story. They claimed without any credentials that nearly all infant car seats failed their tests and that only 2 were safe. Then refused to release any testing information to the companies who's seats failed, the NHTSA (the governmental standards board who sets safety testing), and other critics of the magazine. After a court ordered review of the tests it was found they out sourced the tests to another testing body, never checked their facility, did not install the car seats properly, tested them at twice the intended speed, and reused seats from crash test to crash test (seats can only be used in 1 crash. It will not withstand a 2nd crash). Before checking their findings or thoroughly reviewing the data they send consumers into a fearful tizzy about their infant seats being dangerous. Apparently scientific method is lost on these people, in the science community tests are run several times and findings are offered to critics for review before they are ever allowed to be read by the public. Oh and 'safety ratings 'are a joke too. They do test every seat and determine how safe they think it is but they dont release the pure findings of the test results to the public. They use a complicated formula which combines test results with ease of use, comfort, affordability, and LOOKS. Yes, looks in a 'safety rating'. So a seat that is ugly and performs well and a seat that is nicer looking and performs worse could be given the same rating. There that's my consumer reports rant. I'm done now. Oh and they were wrong about the Dyson. Its not a waste of money, it really is better (and if you let it get too close to a prom dress it will suck 5 feet of it into the wand. The other 3 vacuums i had never did that!)
__________________
My Girls: 1971 Dodge Demon -1991 Subaru SVX |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
-Pavan Last edited by pavanbabut; 03-05-2007 at 08:57 PM. |
|
|