Last post on Dec 09, 2013 at 4:01 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Hyundai Sonata, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, Volkswagen Passat, Mazda MAZDA6, Ford Fusion, Chevrolet Malibu, Kia Optima, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#6741 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [robertsmx]
Oct 25, 2007 (2:06 pm)
As I just said, I posted this info a few days ago (6464). For your convenience, here's a copy/paste from that post:
Most Reliable-listed in ratings order, starting with the best score
Honda Accord (2007)
Hyundai Sonata (4-cyl.)
Toyota Camry Hybrid*
(* means rating is based on one model year)
These are the family cars (CR's classification) that are the highest scoring in reliability, based on CR's latest survey. All but the Accord are the same designs for 2008 as for 2007. I think CR gave the Accord a high predicted reliability rating for 2008, even though it's a new design. We'll see if that comes back to haunt them, like when they said the 2007 Camry would have high reliability, and the V6 models didn't measure up to that prediction based on the survey results.
#6742 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [backy]
Oct 25, 2007 (2:28 pm)
You know Hyundai targets value with Sonata. I think it is getting redesigned next year(?). If I were to ask you, would you say (predict) that it will continue to target value? What criteria did you use?
Next question. When Hyundai launches Genesis, do you expect it to target value?
Back to reliability. Assume that 2008 Sonata does well in reliability score. If CR puts predicted reliability on 2009 Sonata as recommended, it will not be something unexpected to me. But, I must ask, would you then say that they are showing bias for Hyundai by putting recommendation on a new model?
#6743 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [robertsmx]
Oct 25, 2007 (3:14 pm)
I think Hyundai will increasingly highlight the quality and reliability of its vehicles such as the Sonata (note it's now the #2 mid-sized sedan per CR in reliability, behind only the previous-gen Accord), while it continues to emphasize value compared to brands like Toyota and Honda. You asked for my prediction, my opinion, and that's it. Why? Simply, why not use all the weapons at your disposal in a war, instead of just one?
Genesis isn't a mid-sized family car.
Since the 2009 Sonata will be a refresh (e.g. new front fascia, new dash, tweaks of existing engines) and not a redesign, I can see that a reliability recommendation for 2008 would carry over to 2009. But when the Sonata is redesigned (2011 or 2012 MY?), then I would hope CR would wait to see how the new design holds up--just as it should have waited on the redesigned Camry, and the redesigned Accord.
#6744 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [backy]
Oct 25, 2007 (3:32 pm)
Since you conveniently avoided answering my questions directly, I should be able to extrapolate your responses based on your post. Let us see:
The question was: “If I were to ask you, would you say (predict) that it will continue to target value?”
The answer seems to be a big yes. The long first sentence in the first paragraph highlights this. The short ones that follow are all about utter avoidance so I will leave it at that, for now.
The complementary question was: “What criteria did you use?”
Your response highlights an opinion, based on the past. So, you predicted something in the future based on a trend from the past. Did I get that right?
The next question: “When Hyundai launches Genesis, do you expect it to target value?”
Your response to this is another example of avoidance. You didn’t have an issue talking about Focus in an earlier post in this thread, why has size become an issue now? I’m taking another big “yes” for your answer, which will be along the lines of your response to the first, again, based on the past. If you disagree, let me know.
The question: “If CR puts predicted reliability on 2009 Sonata as recommended, it will not be something unexpected to me. But, I must ask, would you then say that they are showing bias for Hyundai by putting recommendation on a new model?”
You didn’t want anything to do with the word bias here and understandably so. But you do seem to understand the point of credits getting transferred from an older Sonata. Then you go on to say about “waiting more”, which says nothing about “projected” reliability now does it? So, to answer the question you should have just said that you don’t want to see CR recommending Sonata based on recent history. Why didn’t you?
If you don’t believe in projections, don’t. And you might as well refrain from making a point on it. But you did. So, how is this different from what CR is doing? Or, are we jumping on CR’s throat for it being “fairly biased”?
#6745 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [robertsmx]
Oct 25, 2007 (3:46 pm)
If you're just going to insult me when I make an honest attempt to respond to your questions, don't bother to ask me any more questions. Especially questions that are based on faulty information or assumptions.
If you want to bash someone because they decided not to follow your lead to go off-topic, that's your problem.
Let us know when you want to return to discussing mid-sized sedans rather than "let's have some fun with backy."
#6746 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [backy]
Oct 25, 2007 (5:48 pm)
Insulting? Since you refuse to respond to questions directly, but still want to argue, I had to get around to get your response. So, may I ask you what was your point around this...
"You asked for my prediction, my opinion, and that's it. Why? Simply, why not use all the weapons at your disposal in a war, instead of just one?"
And then you complain about getting insulted (somehow).
#6747 of 20224 Re: Beyond silly Sable vs Taurus ratings, CR [robertsmx]
Oct 25, 2007 (6:03 pm)
I think you may have misread my response. I was trying to explain why I responded to the question as I did, i.e. that I saw Hyundai emphasizing quality and reliability in the future in addition to value, because they should use all the weapons they have available to them. I don't know why you would be insulted by that response.
I am insulted, however, that you would assume that I am trying to evade your questions and would be presumptous enough to write your own answers when you didn't like mine. So don't bother to ask me any more questions--just go ahead ahd answer them yourself; you're very good at that.
#6748 of 20224 Same old same old
Oct 25, 2007 (6:31 pm)
Another case when Hyundai (Sonata) does something well, and deservedly so, wait, let's try to see if CR is showing bias in the brand (car) two years from now...
#6749 of 20224 2009 Is The Year To Wait For
Oct 25, 2007 (6:43 pm)
MMC and stability control finally on the Ford Fusion
Diesel Honda Accord
6-speeds automatic replaces 4-speeds on all 4-cylinder Malibus (not just LTZ)
MMC Hyundai Sonata with new interior (possible nav and bluetooth)
MMC Toyota Camry (new 4 cylinder engine and maybe tranny fix for V6)
Lots of stuff to wait for.
#6750 of 20224 Re: 2009 Is The Year To Wait For [jaxs1]
Oct 25, 2007 (7:06 pm)
I wonder if Toyota would refresh the Camry after only two model years. They typically wait at least 3 for a mid-gen refresh.
Could 2009 be the year there's another car at the top of the mid-sized heap, by press consensus? Maybe the new Mazda6?