Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Acura RL Acura RL
7335 messages, Last post on Nov 26, 2009 at 12:31 PM
You are in the Acura RL Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: msu79gt82 (Aug 02, 2005 5:57 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: msu79gt82 (Aug 02, 2005 5:57 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: frisconick (Aug 02, 2005 6:38 pm) You can put my Celestial Silver RL in the middle of a plethora rainbow pack of M35's and to me the styling of that RL blows away the bunch (Inside and out)! IMHO 
|
|
If one is looking for justification for what they bought then of course they will like the magazines that echo their own opinions and blow off the magazines that offfer a differing perspective  For those who are seeking information, ALL the magazines offer that. Car & Driver, Edmunds, CR, etc are all useful information sources for those who are looking for information. Of course M lovers wanting their egos stroked will pan Edmunds and RL owners wanting an attaboy will pan CR  
|
|
|
Replying to: steveinindy (Aug 02, 2005 5:40 pm) |
|
|
With Consumer Reports we have to wonder if the test driver is heading back to the lab to find out which dishwashing liquid works best on grease and makes his hands feel softest. What a joke  This line of BS is pure satire right? Its amazing to me the folks who suggest that CR is not about cars  The guys who test hairdryers are NOT the ones who test cars Anyone who throws out that old strawman arguement is deluded. I trust CR who pays for the cars themsleves, buying them off the lot a whole LOT more than I do the "professional" car mags who have had the cars donated to them by the magazines biggest advertisers At least at CR there is absolutely no conflict of interest involved in any of their reports! If folks do not like CR then fine, don't read it. They are simply another independant research tool. Another thing that amazes me are the folks who trash CR's car reviews but laud thier repair record histories of cars. |
|
|
Replying to: msu79gt82 (Aug 04, 2005 11:16 am) |
|
|
Yes, let me second the post that said that the guys who test the cars at CR do not test hair dryers or washing machines. They are technically trained people who test just cars. They buy their cars anonymously from dealers rather than getting cars from the manufacturer which might be hopped up for the review, etc. They have no agenda, no conflict of interest, no vested interest in any outcome. Are they human? Can they make mistakes? Sure. I thought their review of the Lexus GS300 was unduly critical, for example. They are subject to biases like everybody else, but they are not corrupt, bought off, bribed, or influenced by anything but their own reactions to their own tests. By the way, read in Motor Trend that the RL will be getting a V-8. In 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bartalk3 (Aug 06, 2005 7:21 am) I have been a subscriber of CR for many years, and my observation is that CR gets an opinion about a particular line or model of car, and year after year says the same thing about the car, regardless of substantial changes in the car, which other evaluators recognize and give due credit for. Another example of this is my wife's Chevy Suburban. We owned a '96, and it was unreliable, and not a very good car. CR gave a fairly brutal, but accurate assessment of its shortcomings. We traded the 96 in for a 2002, and substantial improvements had been made, which other evaluators lauded. In fact, the entire chassis was redesigned, and the entire ride was changed. We still own it and it's a good car--although it could never compare to my RL! When the CR report came out, all the black marks for various components in the Suburban had been changed to red, indicating above average responses and performance. It truly was a totally different and improved car. If you look at the narrative on the 2002 Suburban from CR, they even continue to use the exact same wording as the 96 evaluation and make no mention of the improved performance or styling, instead choosing to focus on their preconceived notions of what they believe the car is and how it performs. That is all I am saying--CR appears to stick with its preconceived ideas of the car and does not allow the data to affect its conclusions.
|
|
|
Replying to: steveinindy (Aug 06, 2005 11:57 am) About reliability ratings they are sometimes inconsistent. For example, when a new Japanese model comes out (e.g., Camry, Accord, etc) they say its predicted reliability is very good or excellent. But when a new AMerican model comes out, they refuse to rate its reliability and withhold recommendation of the car, saying under reliability: "new model." |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Acura RL
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
