Last post on Sep 07, 2011 at 3:17 PM
You are in the Smart Shopper
What is this discussion about?
#631 of 680 CR Rates Chevy Trucks Best
Apr 10, 2009 (6:04 am)
Just a heads up to all the Consumer Reports hater - GM admirers.
CR gives the Chevy Silverado the best review. Are they wrong about that?
#632 of 680 Re: CR Tells the TRUTH [andres3]
Apr 11, 2009 (5:40 am)
>Whatever those facts may be, CR reports them
Be still my heart. That's funny.
#633 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [dbostondriver]
Apr 23, 2009 (8:16 pm)
If Consumer Reports had picked up on the Honda transmission problems in the Odysseys, I would never had purchased a new one in 2004. The same transmission was used in several other Honda models for years that got a pass as well.
There was a know defect in the thing that finally got a recall after years of owner grief. The Honda transmissions that were replaced under warranty with OEM had the same defect and burnt up just like the rest. (even the recall "fix" is iffy in my mind and just a stop gap measure to get them over theold Odyssey run and into the new 05 models.)
The new 05' Odyssey had a different transmission that solved the issue. (no oil supply to a gear that ran dry, heated up and fried) But in the years of every Honda owner haveing the same problem, a CR warning was no where to be found.
Toyota a/t's were also problematic for years...Camrys and Avalons a/ts would 'lock up the tourque converter in high gear and not allow the transmission to shift down quickly...lots of reports of owners nearly getting run into because the car would hesitate and stumble, looking for a lower gear to handle acelleration through an intesection.
That went on for years as well, and CR had no mention. Don't get me started on Toyota engine 'Sludging'!
#634 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [longo2]
Apr 24, 2009 (3:37 am)
Interesting...so how did these two brands get such a great reputation for quality and dependability?
I just test drove a new Insight and came away unimpressed.The thing seemed totally underpowered,had a extremely stiff ride and has what to me looked like a cheap interior.It is well equipped unless you get the base model in which case it comes without cruise control and has hubcaps.It's hardly cheap,still over 20K so why the cheap down of a fairly expensive car.
#635 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [longo2]
Apr 24, 2009 (5:42 am)
Isn't it amazing how CR wasn't on the forefront of notifying folks. The
here about transmissions has new failures continually, often multiple failures in the same car. And the replacement transmissions are over-priced even after Honda pays "part" of the cost.
#636 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [mickeyrom]
Apr 24, 2009 (9:09 am)
"Interesting...so how did these two brands get such a great reputation for quality and dependability?"
Good question mickey, I think part of the answer is the companies relentless happy face PR departments who provide the 'loaners' and free junkets to the Gearheads working at the Car-Mags.
The publications depend on adverstising, and if a few big companies permanently pulled their glossy ad' pages, they would quickly diasapear off the magazine racks.
Car Mags are Big multinational Businesses, and the last place you can source long term reliability information about the Cars they test, but enough people glance at all the glowing quicky reviews and think, "wow, that sounds great!"
Look at the case of Hyundai, they were the Goats of the industry, running jokes on late night talk shows and had replaced the Skoda, Fiat, Lada and the Ford Pinto ( to name a few) as examples of how bad a car could be.
Some Gear Heads still preface the test results of the highly rated Hyundai products by making snide remarks about the companies early models.
It's about time Hyundai had a little chat with these one dimensional hacks and gave them some ideas about original 'lead ins for their reviews.
Ever read a Car-Mag piece mentioning Toyotas 'Early Model ' rust buckets to start a review of the new?
Or mention the Cadillacs with leaky engine blocks (we had one) that sprayed antifreeze like lawn sprinklers to begin a piece on GM products?
To make this long story shorter, my point is, there's no money to made on head line stories of transmission problems, engine sludging, bad head gaskets, leaky interiors, or a thousand other poorly designed or manufactured items from any of the 'Majors'.
Or a car writer that posted his own mpg calculation on his new test model?
In fact if you did take this road, it would be a one way trip to the unemployment office.
#637 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [longo2]
Apr 24, 2009 (9:22 am)
CR lists the 99-03 Odyssey`s as used cars to avoid.If u subscribe to CR or have an account with them-- u can check out.
It specifically mentions the Ody tranny problem on these years and hence lists it in the CR used car list to avoid.
Well for all cars I have owned,CR was so accurate ,,a black dot and I had that problem.I have 2 Camry`s-- absolutely problem free ,one with 120k miles and CR is very accurate on that.Toyota sludging also gets a mention in CR and it lists all the Toyota models and years which were affected.It also states the sludging is mostly due to folks not changing their oil regularly.
I have an 04 Nissan quest and every problem CR lists as a black dot,,I have it.Same for my 99 Ford and 00 Nissan sentra.
So ,CR in MHO is the most accurate out there,,,almost clinical,,U can almost predict the next problem in your car based on its findings.
#638 of 680 Used CArs to Avoid
Apr 24, 2009 (9:42 am)
"It specifically mentions the Ody tranny problem on these years and hence lists it in the CR used car list to avoid."
Good to know, problem was, CR was behind the curve on the Ody transmission issues, when I bought my new one in 2003.
Now if the Ody' was rated then as "New Car to Avoid" I would still be driving my Old Blue Van.
I think CR has to pick up on the problems faster than they do and go with it.
BTW, to be fair, I too have had vehicles that were Black Marked in certain areas that we never had issues with...luck of the draw..built on a Wed?
#639 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [longo2]
Apr 29, 2009 (5:11 pm)
Well it took about 3.5 years or 42,000 miles for my 2003 Accord's transmission to start showing problems and fail (after warranty mind you). Still, Honda stepped up and covered it and paid for everything immediately and I got a brand new tranny for free within 2 days.
This makes complee sense, SINCE CR could not predict the future, but sure enough, around 2007 I started to see black dots on the Accords V6 Auto Tranny in CR. CR made no mistake here with Honda. It's just that the parts didn't fail right away (often enough) to affect CR's rankings.
#640 of 680 Re: Honda Civic Hybrid [andres3]
Apr 29, 2009 (7:44 pm)
"around 2007 I started to see black dots on the Accords V6 Auto Tranny in CR"
My point exactly...that bad Honda a/t had been out since 1999, and it took CR 8 years, and 2 years after that model was replaced by the new 2005 drive train did they finally mention it.
The Accord, Acura and Odyssey all used the same a/t. at least those are the ones I know about.
So, for all of us who bought those affected Honda products from 1999 to 2004 there was no mention of any issues with the a/t's from CR until 2007!
If you research Honda transmission problems from 1999 and on, you will find lot of them were buring up in much less than 3.5 years, some of them in 6 months or less.
Here's a good place to start if you are interested...