Consumers Reports dumps 3 Toyotas off recommended list... (incl. Camry)

[odcics2]

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/consumer-reports-pulls-recommendation-for-three-toyota-vehicles-including-camry/article15123560/

[Ghoste]

I'm surprised they did that but not even slightly surprised about the need to do so. 

[Baldwinvette77]

less toyotas on the road? im all for it 

[JB400]

less toyotas on the road? im all for it 

Yeah, they're hogging all the steel we could use for reproduction parts.

[Fred]

less toyotas on the road? im all for it 

 

[myk]

Does anyone actually care about Consumer Reports?  Based on the article it seems their issue with the Toyota's is their "poor" crash test ratings.  Maybe I'm just a knuckle dragging hot-rodder, but I couldn't care less about crash ratings.  AFAIK the Camry has evolved and arrived at its best when it comes to looks, user-friendlieness and, dare I say it, performance; I mean, a properly equipped Camry would humiliate many cars from the fabled muscle car era and that to me is enough to get a thumbs-up and a "recommendation" from this consumer and his report.

Besides, even if Toytota and other companies with similar reputations started selling junk tomorrow, the trust they've built with car buyers will still see them as sales success stories for generations to come.

Edit.  I just read this off of Edmund's, a group that I see to be just as reliable as Consumer Reports when it comes to reviewing cars:

In government crash testing, the (2014) Camry received a top five-star score for overall crash protection, with four stars for overall frontal protection and five stars for overall side protection. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety gave the Camry the best possible rating of "Good" in the moderate-overlap frontal-offset, side and roof strength tests. In that agency's new small-overlap frontal-offset test, the Camry scored a "Poor" rating (the worst rating), though in fairness, few cars have done well in this relatively new test.

Looks like pretty good safety performance to me, with the exception of some new test that our government overlords deem fit to complicate our lives with.  Just how many more versions of crash testing will cars need to pass in the future?  A nuclear explosion perhaps?  They may as well outlaw cars altogether if they're so "concerned" about public safety because as long as there are cars there will be casualties.  Again, I couldn't care less about crash test standards, especially when I see it's based on some government agency whose ultimate goal is to regulate us out of our cars and freedoms anyway...

[1974dodgecharger]

oh well, I like toyotas they always been good to me. 

[Fred]

oh well, I like toyotas they always been good to me. 

And to me too. I have never had one let me down yet.
Mrs. Fred.

[Ghoste]

And thats fine.  My issue has always been much less about Toyota itself than the immensely sized demographic which does rely on sources like Consumer Reports to instruct them as to which products are cool and which deserve their scorn.  It is the same sheeple mentality which drives the bizarre designer label product market.
I firmly believe all of the automakers build good vehicles and they all have a few turds in the lots.

[BrianShaughnessy]

I guess toyoda failed to make their annual payment to the CR writing staff   

[Mike DC]

You can't get out a stopwatch and test very many aspects of vehicle quality during a brief test drive.
 
What if it wasn't practical to get a sense of a car's performance by test-driving it?  What if performance was the kind of thing that varied more from car-to-car rather than being a consistent quantifiable thing, so you had to go on many different people's feedback to take a guess at what your experience with any given car might be?

In that situation I'll bet guys like us would become "sheeple" to the word of magazines like Car&Driver or Road&Track about what cars are fast & slow.  



I would agree that CR has a clear bias against Detroit.  But Detroit has also done a lot to support their view in the last 30 years.

[bull]

There's some good news in their top 10 least reliable list; five Fords, one GM and zero Mopars.

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/the-10-least-reliable-cars-181031192.html

1. Ford C-MAX Energi (Plug-in Hybrid)*
2. Ford Escape (1.6L Ecoboost)*
3. Mini Cooper Countryman
4. Ford C-Max Hybrid
5. Nissan Pathfinder*
6. Volkswagen Beetle
7. Cadillac XTS*
8. Ford Explorer (V6, 4WD)
9. Hyundai Genesis Coupe*
10. Ford Taurus (turbo)*

[Fred]

And thats fine.  My issue has always been much less about Toyota itself than the immensely sized demographic which does rely on sources like Consumer Reports to instruct them as to which products are cool and which deserve their scorn.  It is the same sheeple mentality which drives the bizarre designer label product market.
I firmly believe all of the automakers build good vehicles and they all have a few turds in the lots.

You're right Ghoste, when you talk about the majority. I guess it's just easier to follow than to lead. (That's pretty much the trouble with society/the world today but that's another subject).
I'm pleased to say that I on the other hand, have never been a sheep although there's nothing wrong with sheep per se, it's people being sheep that's the worry. I'm an individual and can think for myself. I've never in my life bought anything because the market dictates. I don't need any help with what I like and what I don't like and I've never felt it necessary to keep up with the Jonses. So CR's on the whole are of no concern to me.

Mrs. Fred

[ws23rt]

I wonder how many buyers go looking for crash mobiles when they need a car?

If cars and roads were invented today with the safety minded regulation obsessed gov.  They would not allow two lane roads

[RallyeMike]

My issue has always been much less about Toyota itself than the immensely sized demographic which does rely on sources like Consumer Reports to instruct them as to which products are cool and which deserve their scorn.  It is the same sheeple mentality which drives the bizarre designer label product market.

I think yer dead-nuts wrong on that one Ghost. A lot of the data Consumer Reports posts is based on the feedback they get from actual customers. For example, if a car gets bad marks on electrical, its because the survey reports CR gets back from actual owners indicates a lot of electrical repairs or dissatisfaction with the electrical system. So, no, it's not "sheeple" mentality like a run on designer shoes. There is some basis of fact in the reporting. Sure, there is also some opinion mixed in too.

Now I know the conspiracy theorist think the results are all rigged, tweaked, and bought off, ... and I won't even try and debate that. All I know is that the cars I have owned that were turds were reflected in CR as so, and the good cars I've owned were reflected as so in CR reports.

In the end, nobody should put 100% faith in CR like it was a bible, but if you use CR data along with your own research and thinking, I think it's a decent tool to use. 

[64dartgt]

I tried and abandoned Consumer Reports a long time ago.  By the time they reported on something that particular model was often not even available anymore.  Plus they sell your personal information to absolutely EVERYONE.  I finally had to threaten them with legal action before it stopped.  I used a trick my old boss told me about...changed my middle initial...so I know it was them for a fact.