Last post on Jul 16, 2012 at 7:08 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Buick Lucerne, Chevrolet Impala, Dodge Charger, Ford Taurus, Hyundai Azera, Toyota Avalon, Nissan Maxima, Pontiac G8, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#744 of 6854 Re: CR reviews [smith1]
Dec 30, 2006 (11:29 am)
>. They do not give a rating for a vehicle if they don't have enough data to give the rating statistical credibility.
IIRC they rated the Ridgeline as soon as it came out-no data. Of course the same time they were refusing to rate the Malibu even though it was based more on a previous model than was the Ridgeline--which had been their excuse for predicting the Ridgeline would be a wonderful (Honda) vehicle.
Similarly for the Avalon. I do recall seeing a drop the rating at the bottom of a page on a library copy of the mag that I picked up for batteries or cameras or something. But they didn't hesitate to rate it as a wonderful (Toyota) model before data had accumulated. Oddly some people tell me it was an all new car sharing not one part with another Camry similar product... so CR couldn't use the past results on similar models excuse for their preference.
How many reports for 1998 Buick leSabres did CR use for their info? How many surveys of longterm owners did CR use for their 500 evaluations? Shorterm owners?
Lack of info isn't there.
#745 of 6854 Re: CR reviews [barnstormer64]
Dec 30, 2006 (11:33 am)
These are hardly scientific surveys. I, for one, never fill out the surveys. And there's no way to know the motives of those who do
I was asked to fill out a CR survey last year and I was less than thrilled by their methodology. While they do break it down to about 14 or so categories for the problem/reliabilty survey, they only way you can answer is either yes or no regarding problems. To illustrate how that can skew ratings, the way they categorize gives the same weight to a minor engine ping or a failed distributor or engine sensor in the same category. And the categories are vague enough to allow the same problem to be reported in two or more categories, (ie, fuel system, engine minor, engine major) and cause some questionable results.
My take in all this is don't rely on any one single source for car ratings and reviews. And even though the samples may be anecdotal, these and other forums give one real world experiences from the forum users that can supplement the media ratings and reports.
Another tidbit about the CR report: In the instructions they point out that the problems to be considered are ones that you considered SERIOUS because of cost, failure, safety or downtime. There are no directions that define what SERIOUS is and this can allow unnecessary emotions and bias into the equation. Many other reliabilty reports I have seen or worked with in the past define the parameters such as a day in the shop, more than a day, time out of service, etc.
Dec 30, 2006 (11:34 am)
I have to disagree. These are hardly scientific surveys. I, for one, never fill out the surveys. And there's no way to know the motives of those who do.
You can't make anyone participate in any survey, and you can never know the true motives of any survey participant.
So, by this reasoning, I guess you think all survey-based studies are meaningless...market research, focus groups, political polling, etc.?
#747 of 6854 Re: CR reviews [tenpin288]
Dec 30, 2006 (11:40 am)
CR has professional statisticians on staff and has been doing these surveys for years. Do you really think they haven't considered the methodological issues you raised?
I agree, take all available information into account when evaluating a car.
#748 of 6854 Re: CR reviews [smith1]
Dec 30, 2006 (11:46 am)
Do you really think they haven't considered the methodological issues you raised?
I am sure they have taken those into account, but having filled one out, it seem to me that they have created a short, condensed survey that would be more effective if it allowed for more detail to be included. For a topic that so many rely on to be reduced to approx. 14 yes/no questions causes me to rely less on that survey than I used to. If they gave a responder more choices and flexibility in answering/responding, I would give it more credence.
Dec 30, 2006 (12:26 pm)
>survey-based studies are meaningless...market research, focus groups, political polling, etc.?
Perhaps you noticed that CR's survey is allegedly mailed to subscribers only and then only those who choose fill it out--whatever their motive or lack of motive about the car they may or may not even own!
Market research will use a telephone survey of randomly selected phone numbers so that they get a truly random survey. They also collect some data qualifying those who do answer the phone to adjust their survey results. Similarly for political polling; however the people paying for the poll often misuse or misrepresent the results. It's all in the group of questions that being asked in both political and nonpolitical surveys.
I received a phone poll about local news anchors and by the repetitive spiraling type of questions, I believed it would give them good info about the one station's evening news characters.
CR's poll method is called convenience polling in things I've read. It's the same as standing in front of a grocery store in one part of town and asking those entering questions about something--if they choose to talk to you (I wouldn't). I did hit a convenience poll inside Lowes several years back but it clearly was for their benefit; I talked to them.
#750 of 6854 Re: Best large under 30? Hyundai Azera. [tjc78]
Dec 30, 2006 (12:36 pm)
I just took my Charger on a hour trip on differant types of road conditions,and its the best riding car I ever owned,thanks to the Mercedes platform,This car and the 300 ride would out do any Azera or car on this board.They still allowing the Azera on this board,thats suprising seeing that its a mid-size.