mmarshall

Every time the sun sets at night, though, you can depend on it coming back up again in the morning.

TRDRAV4

With today's automotive media, I think CR's influence on buyers is starting to crack IMO; many aren't "following" CR's recommendations. I wonder if people will rebel against CR; a lot of the auto press does act like the mainstream press, who was so biased during this last election, and most who watched were probably blindsided by the actual outcome.

IMO, Toyota/Lexus doesn't need CR's confirmation to affirm their position as being reliable, as much as other makers' need CR's dis-endorsement to sell (See Escalades, Jeeps, Range Rovers).

Toys4RJill

Very interesting way to put it.

mmarshall

The main problem with the auto press (and this has been the case now for several decades) is that they tend to push the type of vehicles that the public, in general, really doesn't care for. That's one reason why CR has been such a success.......they look at auto-buying from a practical and sensible viewpoint, and are generally unconcerned with issues such as high-performance, brand-prestige, glamor, or a need to keep up with the Joneses.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

i'm surprised auto magazines have much of any circulation at all given how much free stuff is online.

mmarshall

Look at some of the cheap mail-offers they make and that will probably answer your question.

TRDRAV4

Pubic? OK...j/k

CR has been a mainstay, but I think other sources are gaining prominence over their recommendations. For the enthusiasts, sites like Jalopnik seem to be helping Ford sell their performance models (Fiesta/Focus ST, Mustang, Focus RS). And the other prominent publications are doing the same. I can't count how popular they are on many of the online rags (despite what CR says about their pedestrian models' reliability). Its pretty clear, the enthusiast audience is not necessarily the CR audience, and vice versa. But someone just looking for car information would easily stumble to the magazines and/or the mainstream online rags like Gawker and Autoblog, etc.
Basically, you have to be an idiot to pay for a subscription to one of these mags now (Its been awhile since I had a paid one). Right now, I'm getting C&D free...I was getting MT for free but I wasn't renewed for some reason. I'll probably get it again next year when I can sign up for free show tickets.

mmarshall

CR's on-line subscription, though, gives you a number of things that don't come with the simple magazine subscription...or just by browsing their web site. They make you pay, one way or another, to access much of their data. That's probably because, inline the enthusiast mags, CR does not get (or want) any corporate advertising to fund them.

Sorry...a typo. I'll correct it.

Corey140

The wind buffer issue with the GM Suv's is probably the reason for their bad ratings.

BoDarville

you just made my point -- the fact that some drivers find a navigation or infotainment system difficult to use should not make the vehicle rated as UNRELIABLE. that is no different than rating a Nissan Versa as unreliable for being too slow. if they want to berate a poor design or cheap interior materials, than do so in a review of the vehicle design or as a separate category, not in the vehicle reliability ratings. the only things that should count against a vehicle's reliability rating are reported failures, vehicle recalls, and consistent anecdotes or reports of premature wear of vehicle components. the end - stop defending an entity just for the sake defending - i am starting to think you are the source of the CR kerfuffles somebody else complained of. does your uncle work for CR? stop slurping on them!

mmarshall

First of all, no, I'm not making your point. I never said complex touch-screens make a car unreliable. I said (and will continue to say) that IMO they, under some conditions, can be a PITA.


Correct......and CR, of course, doesn't do that.

That's usually the way they do it.


I will when you stop attacking just for the sake of attacking.

Excuse me, but my uncles have all passed away.

I'm not slurping on anybody. I've simply read CR for many years and decades, and report on what I've seen. If you don't like my posts, then no offense, but that's not my problem.

And I'll also repeat here what I said in an earlier post........if you don't like CR, then kindly show us a better source.


Last, you can dislike a magazine, or disagree with someone, without getting rude. This is a civilized car forum, not a free-for-all on the tabloid-blogs.

Aron9000

I actually like having the paper copy of the magazine, its great for reading on the can. Seriously though, it is nice when you are suprised and get a new rag in the mail. Plus I really like the photography in Road and Track, there is something about seeing it in print vs clicking on the computer and waiting for their janky website to load, then having to close all the stupid ads and junk they put on the website.

Toothpick

[And I'll also repeat here what I said in an earlier post........if you don't like CR, then kindly show us a better source. ]

In my opinion truedelta-dot-com is a way better resource for histirical reliability records, with details about most common problems.
Fuelly-dot-com is a good place for a real Mpg stats.

http://www.truedelta.com/Toyota-Sien...arison,275-113

http://www.truedelta.com/Toyota-Sien...n,275-113,2005

And first year model from any manufacturer have to be avoided , if you are holding your cars forever and realiability is top priority.
If you only lease your car for two or three years - then who cares about reliability or price depreciation .

I am not trying to trash CR, but I personally found that their car reports to much generalized. Also CR reviewers never
look at the cars they test from an ownership stand point. So long term reliability , true cost to own , true MPG and value depreciation never a major key factors in CR reviews.
When we are looking for a new car , we always know what we will be using it for, and what are important characteristics for our usage scenario. Usually we narrow down our potential choice for two or three candidates.

For example, when I was looking for a new minivan for my wife in 2005 , CR #1 recommended minivan was Honda Odyssey
because of it's more sharp handelling. And for me Toyota Sienna was a no brained winner , beacause of what was really important for me: 3500lb towing rating ( vs 1500lb for Honda), much more reliable transmission
, 4x8 cargo space, ....

mmarshall

I took a look at those sources you posted. Overall, they do appear to be pretty good (I've seen lots worse) ....though the amount of data-input from actual vehicle owners seems unclear.


That's not the only selling-point for Siennas. They are also the only minivan currently sold in the U.S.market with an AWD option for bad weather.

vicpai

Respectfully, but VERY VERY STRONGLY disagree with your assessment! Honda's reliability is nothing but a myth Honda has turned into a company with very mediocre to subpar reliability and is possibly one of the WORST Japanese companies today. In the last decade or so they have completely dropped the ball on reliability and it appears they could care less about the direction they are going in

Go to the MDX website and see the number of problems they are having there!! And consumer reports has rated the Acura TLX and the Acura RLX as one of the least reliable vehicles (and I completely agree with their assessment). The MDX is FUNCTIONALLY an outstanding vehicle (super quiet and smooth engine, phenomenal ride comfort, fantastic styling etc.) and I would be driving one today if not for the sub par reliability and durability!

Sadly Toyota/Lexus is the only manufacturer left that makes TRULY reliable and durable vehicles with extreme longevity! So, as someone who worships at the altar of reliability, regardless of what they dish out, I'm forced to "hold my nose" and buy their products!!! Luckily for me, after a very very extensive search, I found a Lexus model that I did not "have to hold my nose" and buy ......extremely happy with my 2014 ES 300h