GM Exec Slams Consumer Reports

[mustang84]

Link

Lori Queen, General Motors executive on C/R:

"the most unprofessional group of people I have ever worked with."

"They are totally nonobjective and go to great extremes to paint a picture for their paid subscription readers".

"They buy the cheapest car they can find and then base all their opinions on a limited sample."

"This year's Consumer Reports top ten list of vehicles named only Japanese automakers, leaving Detroit out in the cold for the first time since 1997 when the list began.

Detroit auto executives were a little hot -- if not burning -- and have fired back at the consumer magazine.

Lori Queen, who is a General Motors executive involved in small car production told the Automotive News in an e-mail that the editors and reporters who put together the Consumer Reports auto issue are "the most unprofessional group of people I have ever worked with."

"They are totally nonobjective and go to great extremes to paint a picture for their paid subscription readers, who primarily buy Japanese cars. They don't consider price or price differences, they don't consider model mix or consumer preferences, they buy the cheapest car they can find and then base all their opinions on a limited sample," Queen told the automotive magazine.

For the record, the Consumer Reports top ten included the Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Acura TL, Infiniti M35, Subaru Forester, Toyota Highlander Hybrid, Honda Ridgeline, Honda Odyssey, Toyota Prius and Subaru Impreza WRX/STi."

More at link

Edited March 15, 2006 by mustang84

[Flybrian]

She's wrong. They buy the cheapest domestics against well-equipped imports. See the not-so-old comaprison pitting a loaded Avalon XLS against a LeSabre Custom and Bonneville SE where they bitched about the floaty rides of the two GMs ignoring the optional touring/sport packages available with BOTH those cars. Oh, and also the fact that one could get a LeSabre Limited or Bonneville SLE for the price of that XLS. That wasn't mentioned once.

[rez7777]

GM is touting JD Powers survey for the Malibu's initial and Long term reliability.

Consumer Reports gave the Malibu A half a Black Circle and gave the Colbalt a Big black circle for reliability (most un- reliable) in their new car issue. Who do you believe JD or Con sumer Reports? Most liberal media touts Con sumer Reports. What would most people do if they see a big black Circle for reliability for a car, not buy. Consumer reports is not stupid as they will through a couple good reviews for GM and Ford to make them not to looked biased. Usually not for the leading segment for sales.

[FAPTurbo]

Car manufactures should review magazines and give Consumer Reports no stars for giving the reader an undue amount of paper cuts. Then whine about how the newstand editions are too expensive for what they offer, ignoring that you can subscribe, too. Afterward, rate CR as "Poor" in the "Using The Magazine As A Coaster" test due to not absorbing all of the water spilt upon it due to the excess gloss. Then, rate it as "Poor" in the "Using A Pile Of The Magazine As A Table Leg" test, citing that the garish graphic design of the magazine scares away guests. Finally, rate CR as "Poor" in the "Rolled Up Magazine Fly Swatter" test, due to the excessive amounts of bull$h! contained within the magazine attracting more flies.

After 3 days of testing, CR has been rated "Average" for Bathroom Absorbancy Use. Due to the excessive gloss, the absorbancy of fecal matter is mediocre compared to competitors. However, the use of this gloss prevents chafing on some of our older testers.

[Guest Josh]

It is about time somebody in name value slams these magazines with blatant adgenda's. I commend you Miss Queen. Many salaried employees do as well.

[76ChevyTrucker]

I'm very glad that she slapped down CR, and like y'all said, they take a base model domestic vs a fully leaded import and expect the domestic to perform.....yeah, right.

[PurdueGuy]

another interesting CR slam article

http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/news,v...rtid=58024&pg=1

Not nearly the slap in the face as Miss Queen's comments, but still...

[Newbiewar]

wish we saw some more of this... by the accual media...

as for the idea of bad reporting... there should be a magazine that reports every media source for accuracy... it would probably clean up a lot of TV stuff and magazine claims...

[MyerShift]

It's about time someone more prominent reveals what we have felt for years. Congratulations Lori Queen.

[RJB]

Give them Hell Lori!! This magazine has become such a pile of crap. The only thing I would use it for is to start a fire when I go camping.

[hyperv6]

This is good but not enough!

GM and Ford need to hit CR in the press with cold hard facts on how they twist the truth. As of now the pro 4n media and owners will just call it sour grapes and get away with it. Again!

If GM I would have a investigation done independently and present them to the consumers in their own advertising.

[Dsuupr]

Thanks Lori. Good job.

[PurdueGuy]

it would probably clean up a lot of TV stuff and magazine claims...

Why? just because 74% of all statistics are made up?

Edited March 15, 2006 by PurdueGuy

[CARBIZ]

Lost in the media frenzy to bash American autos is the fact that no European vehicles were named to the Top Ten either. The vaunted names Audi, BMW and Mercedes, all costing thousands and thousands more than their Buick, Pontiac, Chev or Ford counterparts were also shut out. However, the media tends to focus on Detroit and ignore Europe. After all, most of these hacks are driving BMWs and Mercedes anyway.

[Derek77]

I find something funny about Consumer Reports overview of the Equinox and the Highlander Limited. They talked about how crapy the gas mileage was for the Equinox, but didn't say that the Highlander's mileage was just as crapy. How can that be the Highlander recieved a FAIR gas mileage rating and the Equinox got a POOR?

Mileage for the Highlander Limited was:

CU's overall mileage, mpg 19

CU's city/highway, mpg 13/25

CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 22

Mileage for the Equinox was:

CU's overall mileage, mpg 17

CU's city/highway, mpg 12/25

CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 22

The agility could be fixed if they tested an Equinox with 17" wheels instead of the 16". That could have increased the Avoidance maneuver max. speed, mph from 47.5 to the Highlanders 48.5mph. Apparently the 1 mph is enough to give the Nox a FAIR emergency handling rating and the Lander gets a GOOD rating. The Lander had 17" wheels in their test just to let you know.

Cargo room was another low in their test. They show a 33 cu.ft. and GM shows 35cu.ft. And that is with the cargo system in the back. Would, lets say 37cu.ft. without the cargo system, be enough to not complain? The Highlander has 38cu.ft.

The tip up in gov't rollover test could have been fixed with 17" wheels too, I think. Wider wheels and tires would fix that if you think about it. Funny thing is they still gave it a VERY GOOD in their roll over test even with the tip up.

[drew770]

I totally agree with Lori but I also understand that CR is only reacting to years of Detriot Crap!

CR expects Ford and GM to give us less than stellar vehicles. They expect that the fuel economy would be worst than it's foreign counterparts or that the interior would be full of fit and finish issues and made of cheap plastic!

And for the most part, CR and the American consumers have been right! Even though Ford and GM has made great improvements some of their cars and trucks still doesn't match the competition.

Prime example is the Fusion! It's a great car but still not any better than the Camry or Accord. What about the Cobalt? Its pretty good but it would have been class leading 5 years ago!

If Ford and GM wants to really beat CR at its own game than they need to give America cars and trucks that are above and beyond the competition not just almost!!

[ponchoman49]

Toyota Reports with it's yuppie appliance writers gets there much deserved bitch slap. Yeah!

[packardlust]

I totally agree with Lori but I also understand that CR is only reacting to years of Detriot Crap!

CR expects Ford and GM to give us less than stellar vehicles.  They expect that the fuel economy would be worst than it's foreign counterparts or that the interior would be full of fit and finish issues and made of cheap plastic!

And for the most part, CR and the American consumers have been right!  Even though Ford and GM has made great improvements some of their cars and trucks still doesn't match the competition.

Prime example is the Fusion!  It's a great car but still not any better than the Camry or Accord.  What about the Cobalt?  Its pretty good but it would have been class leading 5 years ago!

If Ford and GM wants to really beat CR at its own game than they need to give America cars and trucks that are above and beyond the competition not just almost!!

[Sixty8panther]

Give em hell Lori!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CR can suck my Darelique! [/zoolander]

[packardlust]

Every time I read one of Consumer Reports ratings based on members responses I see the 1946 Chicago Tribune Herad Headline "Dewey Wins" Presedency. The defects in their unscientific designed sampling in 1946 are the same defects CR has in their top 10 list. It does not matter whether CR is the liberal or consevative press. The sample design is unscientific and their statistics follow suit. I do not know why they continue to pass this seriously flawed data off as relevant, and people who should know better believe it. I know their data and methods are flawed, and they are unable or not willing to try to correct the problems. At least J.D. Powers tries to achieve a scientifically valid sample.

[David]

As a Happy America only auto Owner, GM, Ford and Chrysler needs to slap the media for their stupidity. They should have adds showing those of us that have many great old American Auto's.

My 1994 GMC Suburban, 250K + now with a new engine but otherwise the best rig I have ever owned. My 2005 CTS still rocks even as I approach 20K miles. My 1998 Dodge Dakota Truck with 100K on it also is just damn Solid.

CR seems to also forget that their love affair with Japan is just out of wack due to the cramped inside, lack of leg room for a second person sitting behind a large person and over all lack of quality in the interior plastic BS.

My sister in law has a 1999 Honda Civic, this auto has been in for more recall work and warrenty repairs than any american auto I have ever owned. Plus when will they realize not all Americans are 175LB or less and under 5'8". Us 270 6'6" tall guys need room and that is still also expecting people to fit in behind me when I drive.

CR once again is on the Clueless Bandwagon.

[Cortazzo]

I really hate the CR commercials i hear on the radio, they say at the end, "we're not biased because we don't have advertisers", you don't advertise because you don't advertise, it doesn't mean you aren't biased. If they have a foreign car bias, they are even more free to perpetuate that.

[jhschlak]

I remember when the pontiac/toyota vibe came out a couple of years ago. The toyota model received much better ratings than the pontiac, but they were just about exactly the same!?! I hate CR, but it seems so many people follow it because they think it the gospel truth.

[ToniCipriani]

Should include this as well:

http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/medi...ml?itemId=59955

[thegriffon]

wish we saw some more of this... by the accual media...

as for the idea of bad reporting... there should be a magazine that reports every media source for accuracy... it would probably clean up a lot of TV stuff and magazine claims...

Nobody actually pays any attention. There have been and are media outlets who specialise in giving the slapdown to unprofessional reporting, from bias to blatant goof-ups. Only a very limited audience tunes in unless it makes a good footage for America's Funniest.

[thegriffon]

I really hate the CR commercials i hear on the radio, they say at the end, "we're not biased because we don't have advertisers", you don't advertise because you don't advertise, it doesn't mean you aren't biased.  If they have a foreign car bias, they are even more free to perpetuate that.

They don't have advertisers because they're financed by tort lawyers. "Thats $3 for each plaintiff and $7 million for us."

[Imaj]

They do prefer the Impala over the Avalon and consider it more reliable!

[nzr]

Consumer Reports is a load of biased bull$h!.

[evok]

Lori Queen sounds like a 10 year old crying to her mom, "Why don't people like me". No one cares.

Real people care what CR has to say.

You either back up your claims with hard evidence and bring it forward for the public to review or you shut up and produce product real people want.

If GM has the smoking gun like they did with Dateline and the Side Saddle fuel tank, schedule an interview with the press and make your case.

Comments like this only makes GM and their management look pathetic and out of touch, if valid or not.

[usa1]

It's about time the domestics dealt Consumer Reports a hefty bitch slap.

Car manufactures should review magazines and give Consumer Reports no stars for giving the reader an undue amount of paper cuts. Then whine about how the newstand editions are too expensive for what they offer, ignoring that you can subscribe, too. Afterward, rate CR as "Poor" in the "Using The Magazine As A Coaster" test due to not absorbing all of the water spilt upon it due to the excess gloss. Then, rate it as "Poor" in the "Using A Pile Of The Magazine As A Table Leg" test, citing that the garish graphic design of the magazine scares away guests. Finally, rate CR as "Poor" in the "Rolled Up Magazine Fly Swatter" test, due to the excessive amounts of bull$h! contained within the magazine attracting more flies.

Anyone notice that CR is the last group measuring quality that says Detroit lags significantly? They JD Power, which is a much more objective measurement of quality, paints a much better pictures for Detroit.

I remember the JD Power reports on quality were the one quoted all day long in the mainstream press when Detroit was lagging in the 1980's. Now, they go out of their way to quote the CR reports to make their case on why Detroit is failing. More media bias.

Mark

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

This is good but not enough!

GM and Ford need to hit CR in the press with cold hard facts on how they twist the truth. As of now the pro 4n media and owners will just call it sour grapes and get away with it. Again!

If GM I would have a investigation done independently and present them to the consumers in their own advertising.

I agree 100%...

I was hoping SO badly that this would make MAJOR media coverage.

Oh well, it's a start I guess, and it shows that people ARE starting to question the legitimacy of CR.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Lori Queen sounds like a 10 year old crying to her mom, "Why don't people like me".  No one cares. 

Real people care what CR has to say.

You either back up your claims with hard evidence and bring it forward for the public to review or you shut up and produce product real people want.

If GM has the smoking gun like they did with Dateline and the Side Saddle fuel tank, schedule an interview with the press and make your case.

Comments like this only makes GM and their management look pathetic and out of touch, if valid or not.

I AGREE ENTIRELY!!!!

This is nice, but GM and Ford need to REALLY take CR to task.

But then again, the media HATES GM... So why even try to paint a DIFFERENT picture than what THEY want you to believe anyway?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I totally agree with Lori but I also understand that CR is only reacting to years of Detriot Crap!

CR expects Ford and GM to give us less than stellar vehicles.  They expect that the fuel economy would be worst than it's foreign counterparts or that the interior would be full of fit and finish issues and made of cheap plastic!

And for the most part, CR and the American consumers have been right!  Even though Ford and GM has made great improvements some of their cars and trucks still doesn't match the competition.

Prime example is the Fusion!  It's a great car but still not any better than the Camry or Accord.  What about the Cobalt?  Its pretty good but it would have been class leading 5 years ago!

If Ford and GM wants to really beat CR at its own game than they need to give America cars and trucks that are above and beyond the competition not just almost!!

The Fusion is MOST CERTAINLY superior to the Camry and Accord, regardless what the media tells us.

NOW C'MON GM AND FORD!!!! LET'S SEE A MAJOR MEDIA CAMPAIGN AGAINST CR!!!!!

[Centurion]

A member of the Buick Club of America forums recently shared this link regarding the statistical problems with the CR reports. David Zatz is a professional statistician. Scroll down at the link to see his extensive analysis of the weaknesses with the CR survey methodology:

http://www.allpar.com/cr.html

[Cadavillac]

Kudos to Lori. Consumer Reports needs to stick to MP3 players and toaster ovens.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

It's about damn time! Bite the hand that smacks you, GM, and don't let go until there's nothing but a bloody nub left. Another hand still left? Repeat again, again, and again...

"Consumer Retards" can kiss my ass. When it comes to writing and journalism, there is no room for liars and cheaters. And its about time they finally hit the fan.

[I hope GMRULES again]

CR says the most reliable vehicles in their surveys were;

#1 Toyota Prius

#2 Honda Civic Hybrid

#3 Pontiac Grand Prix

Any comments?

Edited March 16, 2006 by I hope GMRULES again

[regfootball]

CR says the most reliable vehicles in their surveys were;

#1 Toyota Prius

#2 Honda Civic Hybrid

#3 Pontiac Grand Prix

Any comments?

#1 and #2 are the stereotypical CR readers. Maybe the Grand Prix is just darned reliable! GM makes pretty solid cars these days with some of their proven nameplates.

[pow]

The Fusion is MOST CERTAINLY superior to the Camry and Accord, regardless what the media tells us.

In what way?

[Sixty8panther]

The other day while poking around at my old Chevy dealer (where I used to work) I ran into a fellow colegue. He's a great guy, not muhc of a car enthusiast in the traditional sense but a real, honest genuine person. He drives a late 90s Tracker ragtop... 5-speed. He has worked for several different dealerships in the course of the last 30 years or so. Ford, Mazda, Suzuki & now Chevy. He's not really biased in favor or opposed to any manufacturer. He bought the Tracker because he thought from his first hand experience at a Suzuki dealer that the Tracker/Sidekick is/was a great vehicle for the price. He likes the old-school non-nonsense RWD, 4x4 for extreme weather conditions & the manual trans & ragtop for the fun to drive factor.

After talking to him for the first time in like a year I was reminded of a great example of why CR surveys are bull$h!.

A few years ago Russ was sitting there watching TV while his wife was filling out a CR survey. As Russ tells the tale she's a "CR is the bible of capitalism" kind of gal.

So at one point she asks: "How much money in maintenance/repairs/upkeep have you spent on the Tracker in the past year?"

Russ thinks for a minute and says something like $300. This is the grand total for oil changes, a couple of minor repairs and wearable items. (air cleaner etc.)

So the wife notes this fact and continues with her survey.... Their teenage daughter drives a 1999 Celica and so at one point the wife asks Russ how muhc money they've spent on the Celica in the past year...

same as wiht the Tracker Russ thinks for a minute and then says $900-something dollars.

The wife looks up stunned and says: "NO way! ... we did nto spend that much"

Russ says: "probably more than $900 but I know for a fact just the brakes alone that we did this past year cost us $900 for front and rear" Remember, the car needed rotors etc....

So the wife says in a snide voice:

"You mean to tell me that your piece of $h! 70,000 mile Chevy Tracker cost us one third of the money to maintain this past year that our daughter's almost new TOYOTA Celica did?"

Russ say matter-of-fact like: "Yes... what of it, the car needed brakes and we had the Toyota dealer do the job"

So get this....

The wife says: "That's bull$h!... I'm writing down $180 for the Toyota, everyone KNOWS that a Toyota is a better car than some Chevy."

Russ just shook his head and decided to not argue and therefore make his life miserable.

So I ask you, if the wife of a Chevy salesman hates American cars this much and thinks Toyota is somehow infalable than how many others like this are there out there?

I guess maybe I should subscribe to CR and fill out all their surveys... I don't need to lie to make GM out to look good. Even the STS I hate so much has not been bad to me for cost of maintenance... I've only invested like $10,000 total in that car so oh-well... but I've gotten amazing bang-for-the-buck with most of my GM rides.

[Flybrian]

Isn't that the Suzuki-built Chevy-badged Tracker?

[I hope GMRULES again]

Isn't that the Suzuki-built Chevy-badged Tracker?

Yep.

I wish Russ would of had the balls to argue his point with his wife.

[I hope GMRULES again]

#1 and #2 are the stereotypical CR readers.  Maybe the Grand Prix is just darned reliable!  GM makes pretty solid cars these days with some of their proven nameplates.

I agree 100% about 2 hybrids finishing 1-2.

[The O.C.]

I find something funny about Consumer Reports overview of the Equinox and the Highlander Limited. They talked about how crapy the gas mileage was for the Equinox, but didn't say that the Highlander's mileage was just as crapy. How can that be the Highlander recieved a FAIR gas mileage rating and the Equinox got a POOR?

Mileage for the Highlander Limited was:

CU's overall mileage, mpg 19

CU's city/highway, mpg 13/25

CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 22

Mileage for the Equinox was:

CU's overall mileage, mpg 17

CU's city/highway, mpg 12/25

CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 22

The agility could be fixed if they tested an Equinox with 17" wheels instead of the 16". That could have increased the Avoidance maneuver max. speed, mph from 47.5 to the Highlanders 48.5mph. Apparently the 1 mph is enough to give the Nox a FAIR emergency handling rating and the Lander gets a GOOD rating. The Lander had 17" wheels in their test just to let you know.

Cargo room was another low in their test. They show a 33 cu.ft. and GM shows 35cu.ft. And that is with the cargo system in the back. Would, lets say 37cu.ft. without the cargo system, be enough to not complain? The Highlander has 38cu.ft.

The tip up in gov't rollover test could have been fixed with 17" wheels too, I think. Wider wheels and tires would fix that if you think about it. Funny thing is they still gave it a VERY GOOD in their roll over test even with the tip up.

I think your example is a bad example. I hate CR. It's just I think your example wasn't that easy to support.

I've driven both vehicles somewhat extensively as rental cars......and an Equinox is an easily-inferior competitor to the Highlander unfortunately.

As far as the comments regarding fuel economy, the Equinox got two mpg LESS than Highlander overall. AND considering Highlander's way superior and better performing powertrain, I'm not surprised they ragged the Equinox on fuel economy compared to the Toyota. If they had similar powertrains, and similar performance, then you'd have a decent argument.

Also, moving to 17-inch wheels on an Equinox isn't going to dramatically overcome the Equinox's floaty handling compared to a Highlander, which while soft, is much more glued to the road in comparison. That's not even to mention the nasty electric steering in Equinox compared to the Toyota's rack....

[The O.C.]

Lori Queen sounds like a 10 year old crying to her mom, "Why don't people like me".  No one cares. 

Real people care what CR has to say.

You either back up your claims with hard evidence and bring it forward for the public to review or you shut up and produce product real people want.

If GM has the smoking gun like they did with Dateline and the Side Saddle fuel tank, schedule an interview with the press and make your case.

Comments like this only makes GM and their management look pathetic and out of touch, if valid or not.

Unfortunately, Evok's 100% right. This is not the time or the reason to stand up and shout....

As admirable as her intentions probably were, it does smack of desperation.

Why didn't BMW, DCX, Audi, VW, or any other company react in kind? Because they could care LESS about Consumer Reports.

Lori's ranting only brings MORE attention to the fact that no GM vehicles were on the list.....and brings that attention to people that maybe never pick up a CR....but maybe will now to see what she's so pissed about.....

bad, bad, bad

[Domesticated]

I've driven both vehicles somewhat extensively as rental cars......and an Equinox is an easily-inferior competitor to the Highlander unfortunately.

As far as the comments regarding fuel economy, the Equinox got two mpg LESS than Highlander overall.  AND considering Highlander's way superior and better performing powertrain, I'm not surprised they ragged the Equinox on fuel economy compared to the Toyota.  If they had similar powertrains, and similar performance, then you'd have a decent argument.

Also, moving to 17-inch wheels on an Equinox isn't going to dramatically overcome the Equinox's floaty handling compared to a Highlander, which while soft, is much more glued to the road in comparison.  That's not even to mention the nasty electric steering in Equinox compared to the Toyota's rack....

Um, the nox is a far better looking and easily a higher quality vehicle. Sorry, the Highlander is a glorified overpriced Camry wagon(Unless you read the auto rags that'll drool all over it because it IS a Toyota). I've driven the Equinox and it is a fine vehicle. The NVH levels are Caddy smooth as opposed to the raucous Toyota. The interior quality is top notch, the yota feels like a big Toyota Echo inside. It is infinitely nicer than any Toyota, Lexass, Acura, Land Rover, Benz, whatever. Anyone who chooses the Highlander or Pilot (heck even an ML merc or BMW X3/X5 ) POS over the nox is just plain blind.

And they are not buying American like they should be doing.

Edited March 16, 2006 by Domesticated

[pow]

Um, the nox is a far better looking and easily a higher quality vehicle. Sorry, the Highlander is a glorified overpriced Camry wagon(Unless you read the auto rags that'll drool all over it because it IS a Toyota). I've driven the Equinox and it is a fine vehicle. The NVH levels are Caddy smooth as opposed to the raucous Toyota. The interior quality is top notch, the yota feels like a big Toyota Echo inside. It is infinitely nicer than any Toyota, Lexass, Acura, Land Rover, Benz, whatever. Anyone who chooses the Highlander or Pilot (heck even an ML merc or BMW X3/X5  ) POS over the nox is just plain blind.

That's by far the funniest comment I've read today.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The other day while poking around at my old Chevy dealer (where I used to work) I ran into a fellow colegue. He's a great guy, not muhc of a car enthusiast in the traditional sense but a real, honest genuine person. He drives a late 90s Tracker ragtop... 5-speed. He has worked for several different dealerships in the course of the last 30 years or so. Ford, Mazda, Suzuki & now Chevy. He's not really biased in favor or opposed to any manufacturer. He bought the Tracker because he thought from his first hand experience at a Suzuki dealer that the Tracker/Sidekick is/was a great vehicle for the price. He likes the old-school non-nonsense RWD, 4x4 for extreme weather conditions & the manual trans & ragtop for the fun to drive factor.

After talking to him for the first time in like a year I was reminded of a great example of why CR surveys are bull$h!.

A few years ago Russ was sitting there watching TV while his wife was filling out a CR survey. As Russ tells the tale she's a "CR is the bible of capitalism" kind of gal.

So at one point she asks: "How much money in maintenance/repairs/upkeep have you spent on the Tracker in the past year?"

Russ thinks for a minute and says something like $300. This is the grand total for oil changes, a couple of minor repairs and wearable items. (air cleaner etc.)

So the wife notes this fact and continues with her survey.... Their teenage daughter drives a 1999 Celica and so at one point the wife asks Russ how muhc money they've spent on the Celica in the past year...

same as wiht the Tracker Russ thinks for a minute and then says $900-something dollars.

The wife looks up stunned and says:  "NO way! ... we did nto spend that much"

Russ says: "probably more than $900 but I know for a fact just the brakes alone that we did this past year cost us $900 for front and rear" Remember, the car needed rotors etc....

So the wife says in a snide voice:

"You mean to tell me that your piece of $h! 70,000 mile Chevy Tracker cost us one third of the money to maintain this past year that our daughter's almost new TOYOTA Celica did?"

Russ say matter-of-fact like: "Yes... what of it, the car needed brakes and we had the Toyota dealer do the job"

So get this....

The wife says: "That's bull$h!... I'm writing down $180 for the Toyota, everyone KNOWS that a Toyota is a better car than some Chevy."

Russ just shook his head and decided to not argue and therefore make his life miserable.

So I ask you, if the wife of a Chevy salesman hates American cars this much and thinks Toyota is somehow infalable than how many others like this are there out there?

I guess maybe I should subscribe to CR and fill out all their surveys... I don't need to lie to make GM out to look good. Even the STS I hate so much has not been bad to me for cost of maintenance... I've only invested like $10,000 total in that car so oh-well... but I've gotten amazing bang-for-the-buck with most of my GM rides.

A lot of our clients where I used to work were Chevy dealers (MY job was completely unrelated to the auto industry) One of the Chevy dealers wives comes in one day to deposit some money and LOW AND BEHOLD what is she driving??? A brand new Toyota 4Runner.

As far as the comments regarding fuel economy, the Equinox got two mpg LESS than Highlander overall. AND considering Highlander's way superior and better performing powertrain, I'm not surprised they ragged the Equinox on fuel economy compared to the Toyota. If they had similar powertrains, and similar performance, then you'd have a decent argument.

Completely subjective... CR is NOTORIOUSLY unreliable on their "fuel economy remarks" Wasn't it last year that they had a big mid size truck comparison and panned the Dakota for 18 MPG while a competitor also registered 18 MPG and nothing was said?

Why didn't BMW, DCX, Audi, VW, or any other company react in kind? Because they could care LESS about Consumer Reports.

I highly doubt that... The reason none of those companies said anything was 2 fold. 1) NONE of them faced ANY media scrutiny (Everyone in the press was so out to SCREW the domestics that they all seemed to "miss" the fact that no Euros OR Koreans made the list---Of course, it didn't hurt that CR EMPHASIZED the NO domestic POLICY. It was like lighting the bombing range for the media) and 2) Because none of those are VOLUME companies and subsequently none of them are being KILLED by the 'precious asians.' The domestics are where the potential is to GROW asian sales and therefore the domestics are the golden cow that the media is going to milk.

PERSONALLY, I think CR is a little SCARED now that they've seen some future Detroit iron and THAT'S why they implemented the NO DOMESTIC policy in the first place. A last ditch, give 'em all you got to keep 'em down effort. But, as I reported earlier, SINCE I read that press release I've notice EVEN more domestics on the roads and almost everyone (That isn't ignorant) I've talked too about the report believes that something is fishy, regardless of automotive preference.

As far as the Fusion vs. Camry war... I'll justify my opinion when others justify their "imports are better by default" opinions...

THAT is the bullsh*t that causes the perception gap in the first place. Instead of being in the mindset that "those crappy domestics need to prove that they're better to me" MAYBE, just MAYBE you should try telling me why I should buy a Camry over a Fusion for once?

It's the same sh*t, different day... Camry is better by default, IMPORTS are better by default and anything that's said otherwise is automatically "The funniest post I've read all day" THAT IS the IMAGE problem and closed minded opinions like that will be the reason WHY Detroit will never make a comeback.

[Derek77]

I think your example is a bad example.  I hate CR.  It's just I think your example wasn't that easy to support.

I've driven both vehicles somewhat extensively as rental cars......and an Equinox is an easily-inferior competitor to the Highlander unfortunately.

As far as the comments regarding fuel economy, the Equinox got two mpg LESS than Highlander overall.  AND considering Highlander's way superior and better performing powertrain, I'm not surprised they ragged the Equinox on fuel economy compared to the Toyota.  If they had similar powertrains, and similar performance, then you'd have a decent argument.

Also, moving to 17-inch wheels on an Equinox isn't going to dramatically overcome the Equinox's floaty handling compared to a Highlander, which while soft, is much more glued to the road in comparison.  That's not even to mention the nasty electric steering in Equinox compared to the Toyota's rack....

Did you not see where the Nox and the Highlander got pretty much the same mileage, according to CR, in the city and the highway and their 150 mile trip? Does it make sense that they both get relatively the same mileage city and highway but overall got 2 mpg less? A couple hard blips of the throttle in either vehicle and the out come could swing the other way.

And just because the Highlander has a DOHC motor doesn't give them the right to say, "because you have a OHV motor, your Mileage is poor, but the DOHC, which get basicly the same mileage, gets a fair rating", which is what you are saying. Shouldn't the Highlander get ragged because, after all, it does have a "way superior and better performing powertrain", DOHC and 5-speed auto, but only match the Nox? It doesn't make sense.

You missed the point of testing 17" wheels compared to 16" wheels. Go back and read what I said. With 17" wheels, there is less tire side wall. Which means less tire defection, which increases handle capabilities, maybe not feel from the electric power steering, but that could have been a reason for the difference. With them saying a low point was agility, and the only handling test that I can see they test is the Avoidance maneuver max. speed test, and they are only 1 mph different, something doesn't add up.

[Derek77]

Um, the nox is a far better looking and easily a higher quality vehicle. Sorry, the Highlander is a glorified overpriced Camry wagon(Unless you read the auto rags that'll drool all over it because it IS a Toyota). I've driven the Equinox and it is a fine vehicle. The NVH levels are Caddy smooth as opposed to the raucous Toyota. The interior quality is top notch, the yota feels like a big Toyota Echo inside. It is infinitely nicer than any Toyota, Lexass, Acura, Land Rover, Benz, whatever. Anyone who chooses the Highlander or Pilot (heck even an ML merc or BMW X3/X5  ) POS over the nox is just plain blind.

And they are not buying American like they should be doing. 

And I definitely wasn't saying that....