Last post on May 02, 2013 at 7:16 AM
You are in the Isuzu Trooper
What is this discussion about?
Isuzu Trooper, SUV
#3985 of 11964 savvas_e rollover is magazine sensationalism for profit
Apr 11, 2002 (8:38 pm)
Consumer Reports is a USA magazine that reported the Suzuki Samarai a long time ago to roll over easily. For that story they got free advertising on the news. That's all it took to adict them to sensationalism at the expense of the truth. Since then they have attacked the early model Trooper and the 1995.5 Trooper (my particular model that I own) and very recently the Mitsubishi Montero (the big Mistsu SUV under a different name for Australia most likely).
I have the VHS video of the 1995.5 rollover "test" that Consumer Reports says was a fair test and the video shows the Trooper was put through maneuvers that would correspond to 1.2 lateral Gs. More than double the Gs that any of the other SUVs in the test were put through. The Trooper was slolomed at the outside cones while the others were slolomed at the inside cones providing a much straighter path.
The Mitsubishi Montero rollover video was actually run on the news. They drove it fast and rocked the steering back and forth rythmically such that each successive turn added to the body roll built up in the turn before. After about a dozen such wild steering inputs the Mistsubishi was up on two wheels. All they proved was you can roll anything if you want to bad enough.
Isuzu took Consumer Reports to court and forced them to admit to deliberately falsifying the "test" to cause a news worthy event. What they did not prove was that Consumer Reports intended to harm Isuzu. Of course not, all they intended to do was make it into the news. Consumer Reports even spun the court results to sound like they came out on top in articles in their magazine. IIRC it was something like Consumer Reports found innocent on 8 counts brought against it by Isuzu, instead of Consumer Reports guilty in 9 out of 17 counts.
The real proof is that there is hardly ever Trooper rolled.
Consumer Reports should have a Buyer Beware Disclaimer on the cover. You can be sure they will tell a lie to make a buck.
#3986 of 11964 My 2 cents on Consumer Reports
Apr 11, 2002 (9:32 pm)
1. What they did in that Trooper test was really unethical/despicable/etc. and it bugged me.
2. I still read the magazine and find value in some of the automotive information they produce.
3. "Consumer Reports even spun the court results to sound like they came out on top in articles in their magazine." Yes, they did. This was the equivalent to Toyota not admitting fault in the recent sludge/gel issue. Once CR had gone so far and been so vehement that the test was valid and fair, they could not afford to admit they were wrong. So they didn't admit it. That's really bad and it sucks, but it's how companies do things.
4. I don't think CR does these attacks (Samurai, Trooper, Montero) for the sake of publicity. I'm sure they are pleased that they get the publicity, but I think their reason is they actually think they are reporting information that the public will benefit from. They think they are doing good by reporting this stuff, and they think their testing methods are valid. Unfortunately, with the Trooper, once they got a whiff that the vehicle was a little tippy they went hog wild and did everything they could to make it tip over.
5. I would love to see that video! If anybody is willing to mail me a copy, I would really appreciate it. I'll send you advance payment for shipping, etc.-- however you want to do it.
#3987 of 11964 CR, Monty and payoffs
Apr 12, 2002 (5:16 am)
I think CR takes "donations" or "tips" from the automotive industry. That is how the world is everyone is looking for a handout and CR is no different. Suzuki, Isuzu and Mitsu missed their payment and payed dearly with the results. In Australia the Montero is the Pajero I've been trying to get the video so I can put it on my website, if anyone has it and can convert it over I'll host it up.
Apr 12, 2002 (5:28 am)
I definitely think they take pot shots and single out certain manufacturers. If you read comparisons they destroy a drivetrain in one vehicle, and then tout how good the very same one is in a different one. I do buy it every now and again however. I think it is a good source for information, however, not always good information. I take it for what it is worth, biased opinions loosely based on fact. I think where they come off wrong is that they try to sell themselves as an un-biased, not for profit group. When in fact they are just the opposite.
#3989 of 11964 Cup holders
Apr 12, 2002 (5:30 am)
There was some trooper talk in the pilot forum. Someone mentioned the trooper having 5 cup holders? Is that thing in the center console box supposed to be number 5? I have never used it, or could even think how it could really be used?
#3990 of 11964 "that thing in the center console box"
Apr 12, 2002 (5:58 am)
I use a wide bottom cup made by Alladdin sold by gas stations with a logo or at the grocery store or for a huge price at the coffee shop and it fits perfect which leaves the other two cup holders for the kids and wife.
Apr 12, 2002 (6:02 am)
"4. I don't think CR does these attacks (Samurai, Trooper, Montero) for the sake of publicity. I'm sure they are pleased that they get the publicity, but I think their reason is they actually think they are reporting information that the public will benefit from."
I think it cannot be anything other than publicity financially motivated. Any notion that the Trooper "test" was a test and not a publicity stunt would be dispelled by viewing the video.
Paison, how do I convert the VHS video to something you can post on your web site? If I mail it to you can you do it and return the VHS to me?
Apr 12, 2002 (6:11 am)
I'm not sure how to get it into a video file. I think someone on here had one they were gonna convert and e-mail me. If I figure out how to digitize it I'll let you know.
Apr 12, 2002 (6:13 am)
I gotta say, overall I think you guys have the wrong idea about CR. There's more discussion of CR in the Consumer Reports forum (in News & Views?). Some folks have taken time to post some good explanations about CR. They aren't 100% in favor of CR, but they explain the thinking behind how CR does stuff. If you're gonna bash 'em, I'd say it's worth hearing the other side of the story.
Their info and conclusions are not always accurate or consistent with the other major automotive mags, but taking CR as "biased opinions loosely based on fact" seems to be way off.
#3994 of 11964 The people
Apr 12, 2002 (6:16 am)
Who are posting over there are probably the brainwashed people like everyone else that takes CR at their word. I mean in the same exact issue they ditch on Isuzus for "old technology that is long in the tooth" and other manufacturers as "traditional tried and true components, classicly styled" They are full of crappola!