|
mkaresh -> RE: C5 Corvette reliability - better info (10/25/2008 7:06:58 AM)
|
I fully agree with you. If you read my critiques of Consumer Reports, you''ll find that I mention only one source of bias: the need to sell magazines. I do not believe their reliability survey results are biased by them in favor of any specific brand.
I say "reliability survey results" because their presentation of the results in recent years has been, if anything, in favor of the domestics. They''re concerned about their anti-domestic rep in some circles, and have been looking for a way to prove they''re not biased towards the Japanese. As a result, if you look at their recent auto issues and auto previews you''ll see a Ford Fusion on the cover and much emphasis placed on the results for the Ford Fusion inside. Similarly, when the new Malibu and CTS performed well in their track tests, they emphasized this.
So what''s not to like? Chiefly two things that have nothing to do with bias:
1. Their results are often based on old data. So, if you look up data on a four-year-old car next summer, you''ll actually be seeing how many repairs in required when it was between 1.5 and 2.5 years old and had roughly 18,000 fewer miles on it. 18,000 miles can make a big difference in reliability.
2. They don''t post the actual problem rates, only relative problem rates. So you can''t tell, for example, about how many more (or fewer) problems a Corvette will have than a Porsche Boxster in a given year. Two? Three? Four? Actually, in most cases the difference between two cars is well below one problem per car per year. But, when they only have black and red dots to work with, most people think the differences are far larger. This distorts their purchasing decisions.
|
|
|
|
