From: eliot@stalfos.engr.washington.edu (eliot)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Are there any Luxary AWD?
Date: 13 Nov 92 01:59:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: engr.Nov13.005740.20935
Organization: clearer than blir

In article <1992Nov12.231513.29379@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jnielsen@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (John F Nielsen) writes:
>>	_Consumer_Reports_ has a tendancy to favor one brand of cars over 
>>another, and their pinhead readers have a tendancy to take them seriously.
>>Why do they like Honda's so much, IMHO (I own one, and  have tested a few)
>>All their models (save the old CRX Si) are grossly underpowered and grossly
>>overpriced.  But my Civic DOES handle like a gem.

>Name one example, where they are blatantly biased? 

ok.. when they tested the automatic Audi 100 recently, they really
made a big fat stink about the jagged transmission gate, almost
to the point of saying the whole car sucked because of it.

now, the funny thing is that Audi uses the exact same gate pattern as
Mercedes, who invented the idea.  Mercedes' patent has expired which
is why you are seeing cars like the Infiniti Q45 use a jagged gate as
well.  now, since you probably have a collection, i would like you to
cite any test of a Benz or the Q45 where they make a big stink about
the jagged transmission gate.

i can bring up more examples if the above does not do it.

that aside, it seems like such a petty and silly thing to scream so
hard about it.  i personally prefer the jagged gate over the
conventional straight T bar.

>For example they loved the new Bonneville and the new BWM 325i. They
>even put the BWM 5 series on the same rank as Lexus. 

guess what john?  i put the 5 series *above* the lexus.  read my posts
on "inffinity (sic) vs bmw".  it is possible that there are cars that
are better (using a different set of criteria) than the lexus.  acura
has spent quite an amount of advertising dollars telling us.

>Have you ever looked at their rating of the Accord?  They've critiziced
>the car plenty. Also, what other cars in it's class has this "power" you
>speak of? Even the Taurus V6 puts out only 140hp. And, how are their
>Civics underpowered when compared to other cars in their class?

how do you explain the fact that they rate the Acura Integra so highly
when in reality it is one of the most mediocre cars in the market?
sure, it doesn't break down, but in all areas of dynamics, it is the
pits.

why did the original legend get so much praise when the CEO of Honda
himself rates it as "no more than 6 on a scale of 10"?

>I am not saying they are perfect, but they've been ratings cars longer
>than most of us have been alive all independant of any advertising.

hey, i'm not getting any money defending bmw from its critics.  does
that make me completely objective?  the problem with CU is that they
*pretend* to be objective (or maybe they really believe that they are
objective, whatever) when in fact they've got all their little
anal-retentive nitpicks which typically cloud the whole review.

when they test a good Subaru, they will say things like "surprising
for a Subaru".  doesn't that sound like prejudice?

>There's a lot of people who are more prejudiced about CU than CU
>is prejudiced.

it could very well be that people have opened their minds a little bit
more and found that CU doesn't quite cut it.  look at it any way you
want.  if CU is so great, why are there so many critics and skeptics
of it?

ok, since i'm in the mood, here's another piece from the past:

pg 216, April 1992, CR sez:

"We test all cars to the same standard - a kind of idealized family
sedan - not to a relative standard that changes with the type of car."

which means that a car like a Prelude or Miata will be evaluated with
the same criteria as an Accord/Camry/Taurus.  this is their excuse for
giving unfavorable reviews.. but then, this "standard" of theirs in
not in evidence when they test a sports car that they like, like the
Miata.  anything that is different from orthodox japanese is
immediately judged to be bad or wrong.  their narrow-mindedness is
very tiring.

i leave it to the readers of this post to make up their minds what to
think of the above.. i can't imagine why they won't take it a step
further and say:

"We test all cars to the same standard - a kind of idealized family
toaster cum waffle iron - not to a relative standard that changes with
the type of appliance" !!!!!!!!

CU/CR could legitimately claim to not be influenced by advertising
dollars, but that doesn't mean that they understand cars at all.  my
evaluation of CR is that they don't.  CR bragging about not taking
advertising dollars is like Ross Perot saying that he will be a great
president just because he doesn't accept PAC money.  (oops opening a
can of worms here!!! arrrgghh)


eliot