Jump to content

consumer reports


balthazar

Recommended Posts

All you starry-eyed CR worshippers that get the warm & fuzzies when quoting re-affirming company rhetoric, you may want to reach for some Valium.

The associated Press is reporting this morning that the Yonker NY-based 'consumer advocate' magazine has retracted a strong, damning review of infant car seats (only 2 of 12 'recomended') when federal government review showed CR tested the seats at drastically higher speeds than they claimed.

Most of CR's test samples showed 'disasterous failure' at speeds stated to be as low as 35 mph. One infant dummy was hurled 30 feet. But NHTSA revealed that some of the crash tests were conducted under conditions that would represent being struck at more than 70 mph.

Ahh yes: "no advertising = 100% no bias or agenda".

IMO: The magazine has enough clout & influence that it's practices and formulas should be subject to full disclosure & government regulation. Repeated refusal to do so (full disclosure) only points to one thing: hidden agendas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate C.R. even more than I hate Toyota & Honda. For this very reason.

The NUMI car example is a case in point that their heads are up their @$$es.

but I'm not going to cite that example again... no need to beat a dead horse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was the gluttony of being obsessively commanding. 2 out of 12 seats were acceptable, give me a break. Which means either 10 companies are not doing their jobs well or one is not evaluating their jobs well. Even a person not knowledgeable in that area will have doubt about their results. It is about time that they were going to be hammered.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consumer Reports .... Unsafe to Read!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's lame that they misreported it, but when you think about it, a 35mph collision tells you what? That's two vehicles hitting each other each going under 20mph. A 70mph+ test would at least give more realistic results. For the two chairs that passed the test at those speeds, good for them, they should still be recognized ahead of the other chairs for being safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consumer Reports .... Unsafe to Read!

And tonight on the 11:00 o'clock news, New Study shows that reading

Consumer Reports can make you sterille, turn you kids into satan

worshipers and give you a$$ cancer. Stay tunned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's lame that they misreported it, but when you think about it, a 35mph collision tells you what?...

A 70mph+ test would at least give more realistic results.

OK- as long as we ALSO offset-slam cars & trucks into immovable barriers @ 70+ mph! Can't wait to see the pics!

Seriously, I would have to imagine the 35-38 mph a lot of impact tests are done at represents some sort of median speed: most vehicles are not averaging anything close to 70. While the results would be interesting (well, we have them for car seats anyway)- it's statistically immaterial.

Of course, the point is that CR lied.

What else have they intentionally misrepresented or lied about to serve editor's agendas/personal biases, because no way in hell is this the only occurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK- as long as we ALSO offset-slam cars & trucks into immovable barriers @ 70+ mph! Can't wait to see the pics!

Seriously, I would have to imagine the 35-38 mph a lot of impact tests are done at represents some sort of median speed: most vehicles are not averaging anything close to 70. While the results would be interesting (well, we have them for car seats anyway)- it's statistically immaterial.

Of course, the point is that CR lied.

What else have they intentionally misrepresented or lied about to serve editor's agendas/personal biases, because no way in hell is this the only occurance.

Speaking of lying for money and pants down, Lutz shared a story this week about inviting Paul Lienart over for a meeting, and asking him to point out the large interior gaps on the interior of the GM same car he just reviewed....Paul said he "wouldn't point them out- only if GM gave him a consulting contract like Toyota does......" hmmmmm The damn Lienarts no longer write for the papers in Detroit.

awwwww. bastards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The beginning of the end for Consumer reports. Well, I may be exaggerating, but it will definately tarnish their name for quite some time.

Funny thing about this, they sourced it out to another testing facility and are trying to blame it on them. Hey, it's not their fault you don't check your facts CR!

It's too late though. The public has heard enough and Consumer Reports had its name plastered all over the news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lutz shared a story this week about inviting Paul Lienart over for a meeting, and asking him to point out the large interior gaps on the interior of the GM same car he just reviewed....Paul said he "wouldn't point them out- only if GM gave him a consulting contract like Toyota does...

w-wh-What? The lienarts are on the take from toyota but they're car reviewers?? Not that anyone would ever read a single article and then take them seriously, but that is just F-ed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest YellowJacket894

Some one needs to shut the "magazine" down. It's not journalism or anything of the sort. CR is a bunch of ignorant, corporately sponsored, anti-American assholes who gather in a room once a month so they can write drivel for the companies who pay them amounts of money they in no way deserve. They're a f@#king PR department, not people who want to benefit for the welfare of the American consumer.

I hope the publisher drops them. And soon. The sooner we get rid of corrupt publications, the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some one needs to shut the "magazine" down. It's not journalism or anything of the sort. CR is a bunch of ignorant, corporately sponsored, anti-American assholes who gather in a room once a month so they can write drivel for the companies who pay them amounts of money they in no way deserve. They're a f@#king PR department, not people who want to benefit for the welfare of the American consumer.

I hope the publisher drops them. And soon. The sooner we get rid of corrupt publications, the better.

They publish themselves. They are independent, good or bad, so they really don't have to disclose anything. It is all funded by subscripitoins and donations. I think CR is like 30 bucks a year if I remember right, it's not cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>"They are independent, good or bad, so they really don't have to disclose anything. "<<

That very well may be true, but why refuse to reveal those methods & formulas- why all the big hush-hush secrets ?? If the PR spin is to be believed- they are only 'in it for the good of the consumer' or the like... so prove it. I realize that for some, CR a faith-based religion, but proving your above-board goodness to non-Pavlovians will only stuff the till that much more.

Unless........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...