LexFather

Consumer Reports toughens car rating system
10 models, including 2 from Honda and 3 from Toyota, make it into top-tier group

By Matt Nauman

SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

Tuesday, May 31, 2005

SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Consumer Reports has changed its car-rating system, and now it wants to change how some people view it, too.

"A lot of people think we're white-coated toaster testers," said David Champion, the ex-Land Rover and Nissan engineer who has been senior director of the magazine's Auto Test Center in Connecticut since 1997.

Some characterize Consumer Reports and the check mark that comes with its recommended rating as the single most important influence on American car buyers. Others see the nonprofit organization as a dispassionate number-cruncher that takes the emotion out of driving cars.

"We love cars," Champion said during a recent visit to San Jose.

About 6 million people subscribe to Consumer Reports, either the printed or the Web version. Besides the monthly magazine -- the April auto issue remains the best-seller -- the organization does specialty publications and sells personalized buying guides.

Its seven automotive engineers head a staff of 20 who put vehicles through dozens of tests at its 327-acre auto-test facility. It includes a track, a skid pad, an area for wet and dry braking tests and a section of rough road.

Consumer Reports doesn't take advertising, doesn't allow its name to be used in ads and buys everything it tests. In 2004, it spent nearly $2 million on new cars. Vehicles are driven 6,000 to 8,000 miles and subjected to 45 tests, including fuel economy, emergency handling and towing.

Those tests result in a score that ranges from poor to excellent. Then annual surveys from about 250,000 subscribers are used to compile reliability ratings. Once government and insurance-industry crash tests are factored in, the magazine figures out which vehicles to recommend.

To get a check mark -- 81 of 222 models in 2005 are recommended -- a vehicle must perform well in the magazine's tests, be of at least average reliability according to owners and perform at least adequately on crash tests.

This year, however, after the April issue reached subscribers but before it hit newsstands, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released some new crash-test results. Consequently, Consumer Reports stripped its recommended rating from seven vehicles -- six from Asian makers as well as Ford's Focus.

That predicament prompted Consumer Reports to change its ratings a bit.

Starting with the June issue that's now on sale, the magazine will offer a two-tier rating system. The first-tier group matches the previous standard: vehicles that are good in the magazine's tests, have good reliability ratings and that "provide good overall crash protection," if they have been tested. Pickups and sport-utility vehicles must come with stability control or not tip in the government's rollover test to get a first-tier recommendation.

The first-tier rating seeks a balance, so that a vehicle that hasn't been fully crash tested or one that does poorly in a single test might not be eliminated. As a result, the seven vehicles that lost their check mark have gotten it back as first-tier recommendations.

The top-tier rating, which will be identified with a check mark within a circle, must do all of the above as well as providing "very good or excellent crash protection" in frontal-offset and side-impact crash tests conducted by the insurance institute.

Ten vehicles -- Acura TL, Honda Accord, Honda CR-V, Hyundai Santa Fe, Lexus ES 330, Saab 9-5, Subaru Forester, Toyota Camry, Toyota Corolla and the Toyota RAV4 -- are the first to get the more-stringent top-tier recommendation.

That list should grow, Champion said. He thinks automakers will design their vehicles to achieve the highest rating. The result will be safer cars.

Champion offered a few other tidbits:

* Headlights. Consumer Reports has begun testing headlights as new technologies emerge, and vast differences are being seen.

Of 91 tested vehicles, the 2005 Lexus GX470, the 2003 Toyota 4Runner, the 2003 BMW 745Li, the 2004 Toyota Sienna and 2004 Dodge Durango had the best headlights. Those on the 2005 Volvo V50, 2003 Lincoln LS, 2004 BMW X5, 2004 Acura TSX and the 2003 Subaru Baja were worst. Bulb type wasn't that important.

* Reliability. Automakers try to standardize quality, but they make cars and trucks in different plants on different continents using different suppliers. The results are that quality varies. Champion showed a chart that ranked the best and worst car for each automaker. Lexus, Toyota, Subaru, Honda and Acura topped that chart, as each brand's worst-quality model still was pretty good.

Some brands with the longest lines, indicating the biggest differences in best and worst quality, were Hyundai (Sonata good, Tiburon bad), Chevrolet (Colorado good, Astro bad), Nissan (Maxima good, Quest bad), Volvo (S60 good, XC90 bad) and Lincoln (Town Car good, Navigator bad).

* Fuel economy. Consumer Reports measures its own mileage and is a leading source for those who want the EPA to change its ways. Earlier this year, AAA called the government's fuel-economy ratings "bogus." Critics say the government's mileage tests, which are done in a laboratory, don't reflect real-world driving conditions.

The 10 most efficient models that the magazine has tested are the Honda Insight, Toyota Prius, Toyota Echo, Honda Civic Hybrid, Scion xB, Scion xA, Toyota MR2, Mini Cooper, Mazda3 and Scion xB. All had manual transmissions except for the Prius, the Civic Hybrid and the Scion xB.

Consumer Reports' new top-tier autos

Acura TL
Honda Accord
Honda CR-V
Hyundai Santa Fe
Lexus ES 330
Saab 9-5
Subaru Forester
Toyota Camry
Toyota Corolla
Toyota RAV4

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

NO surprise Toyota and Honda are all among the top tier. I'm surprised Hyndai is up there as well. Good for them, they have come a long way.

For the headlights I'm surprised the BMW X5 and Acura TSX are among the wosre headlights. I wonder if their test doesn't favor the more European (E) code lights? I thought the BMW X5 lights were pretty darm good, and my brother in laws 05 TSX with HID is just as good as any other car with HIDs I've been in . If those two examples are among the worse headlights, I feel confident that nearly all headlight systems nowdays are pretty good then.

KrazyLexus

I am surprised the POS TL got on that list. Thats how much Consumer Reports is bs.

mmarshall

With rare exceptions, Consumer Reports is anything BUT BS. They have what is probably the best and most complete repair and reliability indexes in the auto world, eclipsing even J.D. Power in a number of areas. Much of what we know about how reliable certain vehicles are and are not (even here in the CL Car Chat forum) is due to the throughness of this magazine, more than any other single source. In fact, I have noticed that much of Consumer Reports' reliability ratings are more or less matched by the Four Seasons' durability testing of specific cars that the enthusiast magazines like Car and Driver, Road and Track, AutoWeek, and others do.

A car does not have to have a first-rate repair record to make CR's recommended list. It need have only an average record yet perform well in CR tests and have good crash tests. While the TL has had some well-publicized problems with automatic transmissions, primarily in the model years 2001 and 2002 with 2000 to a lesser extent, ( and, by the way, now rates average in reliability ) Acuras in general have been well above average over the years....pretty much equal to most Lexus models.

UDel

You seem pretty bitter against the TL. Maybe you are regretting not having the best experience with Infiniti/Nissan yet you chose to own another one and are trying to convince yourself that the G35 is a superior car over the TL even though the G35 is the car known for the cheaper materials, poor fit and finish, squeek, and reliability glitches. I do like the G35 coupe but the sedan just is not that great. Consumer reports may have some questionable ratings but they are right on with the Acura TL, Honda Accord, and Most Lexus products.

videcormeum

That's what I was going to say. Aren't the new TL's prone to developing tranny issues?

Note: I like the TL and I respect Consumer Reports, in fact, I'm a subscriber - but recommending the TL as a top-tier pick given its history does seem a little dubious.

M.

LexFather

GOod point, I thought Consumer Reports took the TL off the "recommended list" as it got sub-par marks for quality. I am SURE of this. Not sure why its back on the list.

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

Prone? No. Possible? Yes. Mostly it is just the lingering questions behind peoples minds with the tranny problem on the last generation TL and other cars that used that particular 5 speed tranny. Still, the majority of TL/CL and 5-Speed trannys out there never actually developed a problem at all. So, while an owner my indeed have that question if his tranny might be a bad one, or if Honda really fixed the problem, all in all the car is solid. All 3 of my friends with the last generation TL-S 2002 and 2003 models have never had a tranny problem. They did; however, still reviece the 100K tranny extended warranty that Honda gave to everyone.

mmarshall

The latest 2005 repair data shows it with an average rating....which, along with their own test results, apparantly is good enough for a recommended rating.

CR, unfortunately, does not put a lot of this data on-line...you either have to be a subscriber, have access to the magazine, or buy the individual copy at the stand. What I recommend doing is buying the two annual new car issues individually that come out in December and April and skip the rest.