CR disses the new Civic...

In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:

I have a CR buyers guide at my desk. Overall Toyotas don't rank particularly high. The general consensus of CR is that Toyotas are fairly reliable but lack driving enjoyment. Crazy claim, no?

Zomby woof wrote:

triumph5 wrote: A LOT of people who view a car as a means to an end and no more (change the oil, buy gas, ho hum), actually take the CR reports quite seriously. Not to be lightly dismissed at all. Then there are THOSE of us....

It's funny what some non-car people have to say about their cars. My wife's take on the Cobalt. "It's my favourite car ever. There is no parking spot I can't get into."

This Cobalt is awesome, i like the shade of red!

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: I have a CR buyers guide at my desk. Overall Toyotas don't rank particularly high. The general consensus of CR is that Toyotas are fairly reliable but lack driving enjoyment. Crazy claim, no?

Heh, i was being facetious/trying to inject humor into an otherwise teeth-grinding thread.

In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:

OK. For the record, I think Rabbits look better than Omnis. And if I had $20K or so to spend on a car, it wouldn't be a Civic or any of the competition.

I think one of the posters here hit the nail on the head, so to speak. IT DOES look like Honda is trying to build a (slightly?) better Toyota than Toyota does, and Toyota is just building the most reliable and quietest APPLIANCES it can produce.

Shades of the great GM and Ford "competition" of the '70s. That is, neither Ford or GM was looking at what ANY other car company was producing....including the imports, just what each other built. Then they copied it. Oddly, GM and Ford now build pretty good cars, while Toyota and Honda build passable appliances.

IMHO in the last few years the interior quality of both Toyota and Honda products has gotten worse, and the interior quality of GM, Ford, Hyundai, and Kia have gotten much better.

It isn't that the other makers have caught up to Toyota and Honda.....they have surpassed them.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Toy and Honda were still mechanically bulletproof, but interior quality-wise they are now playing catch-up.

Spend a bit of time in a new Civic, or Corolla, then spend time in a new Cruze, Focus or Elantra and you will see what I mean. Not only are the materials nicer, but even the fit and finish is better.

Otto Maddox wrote:

Javelin wrote:

Otto Maddox wrote:

Derick Freese wrote: I have a hard time believing people put faith into the same guys that test washing machines. I mean heck, they test cars like washing machines. Cars with more cupholders score better, and they really don't like most of the cars we like. I stopped ready CR when they took the "automatic recommendations" from Toyota. It was at that point that I realized that they are more biased than any self-proclaimed consumer advocate should be.

That argument is really tiring. They have an automotive department. If you look at their ratings, you'd see that they tend to love Porsches, Miatas, BMWs, etc. Their opinions are usually close to those of the big car enthusiast magazines.

To provide the more relevant argument then, CR admitted that they stopped testing Toyota's for years and just gave them all an automatic Recommended rating. Based on that fact alone, I do not trust anything they have to say about any cars.

That is a bizarre claim. Can you back it up? I know for a while for purposes of giving a recommendation they assumed if a prior model of a car was very reliable, the new model would be as well. This was true for all makes, not just Toyotas. But they still fully tested the new model before deciding if they should recommend it.

Have you not seen the news stories? That particular transgression made all of the cable news networks, newspapers, etc. They have started testing them again. I wasn't the first or only person to mention this either so I'm pretty sure that it's not a figment of my imagination.

Joe Gearin wrote: Spend a bit of time in a new Civic, or Corolla, then spend time in a new Cruze, Focus or Elantra and you will see what I mean. Not only are the materials nicer, but even the fit and finish is better.

I don't test cars for a living, but if I were to go out an look for a car in this segment I would go look at Ford and Hyundai and pick which one I liked the best.

On a related note, I was just on the Ford site and it looks like one can only get a manual transmission focus if you stay in the lowest of three trim levels. What is up with that?

T.J. wrote:

Joe Gearin wrote: Spend a bit of time in a new Civic, or Corolla, then spend time in a new Cruze, Focus or Elantra and you will see what I mean. Not only are the materials nicer, but even the fit and finish is better.

I don't test cars for a living, but if I were to go out an look for a car in this segment I would go look at Ford and Hyundai and pick which one I liked the best. On a related note, I was just on the Ford site and it looks like one can only get a manual transmission focus if you stay in the lowest of three trim levels. What is up with that?

TJ - I agree with the "what's up Ford?" on not having the manual across the range, but if you specify the Sport Pack in that trim you get the rear discs and other stuff from the higher models. You can option it out pretty nicely.

In reply to DirtyBird222:

You can buy mine, I don't want it anymore

I went out to lunch today with my dad. He is a big believer in CR and follows their ratings for pretty much everything they test. He is having all kinds of angst over his 2008 Civic because of this review. I would not be surprised if he gets rid of it because of this.

On the plus side, I will probably be able to buy a 2008 Civic for a good price pretty soon.

I respect the opinions voiced in CR at least as much as the opinions expressed in any other magazine. Well, maybe all but one.

And yes, they do like Porsche's and Miatae, and they find most Toyota's boring. Sounds like they've got it figured pretty close.

In reply to Javelin:

No luck finding anything like that with google. Sounds like an urban legend or something with a small bit of truth that got twisted into a fairy tale. I'm still open to reading links. If it made all the networks, newspapers, etc., stories must abound.

Otto Maddox wrote:

Javelin wrote:

Otto Maddox wrote:

Derick Freese wrote: I have a hard time believing people put faith into the same guys that test washing machines. I mean heck, they test cars like washing machines. Cars with more cupholders score better, and they really don't like most of the cars we like. I stopped ready CR when they took the "automatic recommendations" from Toyota. It was at that point that I realized that they are more biased than any self-proclaimed consumer advocate should be.

That argument is really tiring. They have an automotive department. If you look at their ratings, you'd see that they tend to love Porsches, Miatas, BMWs, etc. Their opinions are usually close to those of the big car enthusiast magazines.

To provide the more relevant argument then, CR admitted that they stopped testing Toyota's for years and just gave them all an automatic Recommended rating. Based on that fact alone, I do not trust anything they have to say about any cars.

That is a bizarre claim. Can you back it up? I know for a while for purposes of giving a recommendation they assumed if a prior model of a car was very reliable, the new model would be as well. This was true for all makes, not just Toyotas. But they still fully tested the new model before deciding if they should recommend it.

I'm pretty sure this is what actually happened, but i don't completely remember the details since it was awhile ago. Around the same time that the brake pedal witch hunt was going on.

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to Javelin: No luck finding anything like that with google. Sounds like an urban legend or something with a small bit of truth that got twisted into a fairy tale. I'm still open to reading links. If it made all the networks, newspapers, etc., stories must abound.

I used to be able to find the articles on Autoblog and Jalopnik, but they both changed their sites to stupid redesigns. Ask Derick as he mentioned it as well, and even our resident Toyota fanboy (92celica) remembers the story. CR also tested car seats and called them all but 2 as failures yet it was revealed later that they crash-tested them at 70MPH, not 38MPH (that one you can still find the articles for easily as it was within the last year). These are the same idiots that tried to frame Suzuki for rollovers (remember the taped testing procedure getting leaked where one editor stated he would do whatever it takes to roll it?). If I find anything, I'll link it up.

Yep, i remember the stink, i just don't remember if it was that they weren't testing ANY Toyotas at all, or if they were only testing brand new models.

Either way... if you're putting something in your magazine and recommending it, even if it's just a 2009 Scion tC vs. the 2007 Scion tC you previously recommended.... test the damn thing.

And for the last time dammit... Toyota is dead to me. But i'll continue nut-swinging off the 90s and earlier Toyotas.

T.J. wrote:

Joe Gearin wrote: Spend a bit of time in a new Civic, or Corolla, then spend time in a new Cruze, Focus or Elantra and you will see what I mean. Not only are the materials nicer, but even the fit and finish is better.

I don't test cars for a living, but if I were to go out an look for a car in this segment I would go look at Ford and Hyundai and pick which one I liked the best. On a related note, I was just on the Ford site and it looks like one can only get a manual transmission focus if you stay in the lowest of three trim levels. What is up with that?

Went and drove an Elantra a week or so ago. It was already a bit too isolated-feeling for me, but on top of that they told me that while they do make a manual, it's essentially unavailable, comprising about 2% of production, with dealers allotted whatever their allotted with no ability to order to spec at this point. Whether that's all accurate or whether it's the dealer trying to sell us what they had I don't know, but it removed the Elantra from our list.

Edit:

Got it from CR themselves: http://pressroom.consumerreports.org/pressroom/2007/12/consumer-reports-rates-toyota-highlander-top-among-threerow-suvs.html

"The Highlander is the first model to feel the effects of a decision by Consumer Reports that it would no longer automatically award Toyotas with its Recommended designation because its Annual Car Reliability Survey showed several other models had problems. In the past, Consumer Reports automatically Recommended new and redesigned Toyotas based on the company’s excellent reliability history. If the reliability of Toyota vehicles improves to those levels for a sustained period, automatic Recommended designations could return."

Note that it's dated 12/07, which is pre-Recallgate.

^ Welcome to 2011. Most manufacturer's have put manuals on the "2%" list. That's what it's been for the Acura line for a decade.

OK - I found another forum where someone already had this argument for us. Here is the conclusion -

From a contemporary blog entry

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2007/10/toyota-tumbles... /

"CR says the results are so rad/bad they're changing their "free ride" methodology. Before now, Consumer Reports would assume at least average reliability for Toyota's new cars, without waiting for owner survey data. From now on, the magazine will wait for a full year of reliability survey data before recommending a Toyota product."

Nothing about not testing cars for perfomance, but the usual requirement of reliability as shown by survey data suspended for new or redesigned models (for that first model year, after that survey data was available)

On edit: This is evidently the inital press release.

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/105981712.html

"Occasionally, Consumer Reports may recommend a new or redesigned model too new to have compiled a reliability record if the previous generation, or the manufacturer's reliability track record has been consistently outstanding, AND IF THE MODEL SCORES WELL IN CR'S TESTS"

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: OK. For the record, I think Rabbits look better than Omnis. And if I had $20K or so to spend on a car, it wouldn't be a Civic or any of the competition.

If you or anyone else is about to drop 20 long on a Civic equivalent - I need the money for a nice e46 M3 or e39 M5.

I have driven the Cobalt and it was horrible but the new Civics wasn't much better.

For those folks who mentioned the lack of a manual transmission choice on some cars (either because it's no longer available or not easy to find) we can thank, to some extent, the need to maximize fuel economy. Lately, most cars that are rated with fuel mileage in the high 30s-low 40s are doing it with automatic transmissions.

Ford doesn't offer a manual on it's higher trim lines anymore and neither does Honda on the Civic EX 4 door. This has been going on at other car companies too, it's just that they were formerly "off your radar" (cars like Sonata/Elantra and Optima). The Hyundai dealer near me has no Sonatas or Elantras with manual transmissions, but as of 2 weeks ago had several Hyundai Tourings, including several "leftover" 2010s and a 2009, with manual transmissions.

The fact is everyone has an opinion and a favorite, mine stem from working for both the General and Honda. Yes Honda builds some of the worlds most boring cars to date, not as boring as Toyota, but E36 M3 they last. The Cobalt is great for what it is, just like the Civic is....an appliance.

I guess I didn't type my thoughts clear enough before....I don't hate GMs, I still enjoy their LS powered vehicles, I just hate working on them compared to Hondas.

spend time in a new Cruze

Um. No. Thanks though.