Consumer Reports rates half-ton pickups, raises eyebrows
While we do respect the folks over at Consumer Reports, we do not envy them. Whether the subject is vacuums, lawnmowers or half-ton pickups, nearly every test they perform is scrutinized down to the tiniest of details. We suppose it goes with the reputation of being the most reliable source of production information for consumers, but it's gotta be hell on the nerves.
In its most recent issue, CR is publishing a report on half-ton pickups that might have some crying foul and revisiting claims the publication is biased in favor of imports. Included in the test are the 2007 Toyota Tundra 5.7L V8, 2007 Chevy Silverado 1500 5.3L V8, 2007 Ford F-150 5.4L V8 and 2007 Dodge Ram 1500 5.7L V8. The report puts an emphasis on towing, and (spoiler alert) the Toyota Tundra received the best score of the four pickups. The Tundra also received the "Recommended" label from CR (as did the Dodge Ram 1500), and was awarded a predicted reliability rating of "Very Good" thanks to the past performance of all Toyota's in CR's reader survey results.
We can already hear the grumbling. The domestic half-tons are offered in such a dizzying array of configurations, why didn't CR choose to buy a Silverado with the larger 6.0L V8 and a 4.10 rear-axle ratio (a no-cost option that would have matched the Tundra's ratio)? Jake Fisher, a senior automotive engineer for Consumer Reports, told Mike Levine at Pickuptruck.com, "For our readers, fuel economy is more important than gaining an extra second or two faster time 0 to 60, and we tested the trucks we felt were configured as our subscribers would use them."
More after the jump...
It seems clear that CR could've have made an effort to more closely match the configuration of each truck in this test, specifically the Silverado, but they instead chose to test configurations that they felt were the most popular with consumers. We take their explanation at face value, but considering the Tundra is brand new to market and has fewer configurations, it seems a bit unfair to pit Toyota's monster 5.7L and a rear-axle ratio better suited to towing against a less optimally configured Silverado, especially when a more capable Silverado is available.
Mike Levine does a better job of explaining the intricacies involved here than we can, especially considering he just completed his big Heavy-Duty Shootout and probably knows more about testing pickups than anyone on the planet. He's also read the article in question, which we haven't. Click the Read link to get his take, as well as more quotes from CR itself.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
Don 12:53AM (8/07/2007)
Well, this oughta rally put the hurt to Ford and GM in wealthy Connecticut suburbs. The people who buy pickup trucks and the Consumer Reports demographic don't overlap much.
Reply
Red Star 6:10PM (8/06/2007)
If fuel economy is so important, why did they use 5.7L in Tundra instead of 4.7L?
Reply
mason 6:35PM (8/06/2007)
5.7 gets better fuel economy
Rambo 9:42PM (8/06/2007)
TOYOTA FINDING GOOD USE FOR THE $11 BILLION THEY MADE LAST YEAR...BUYING OFF CONSUMER REPORTS!
CR HAS LOST WHAT LITTLE CREDIBLITY IT HAD LEFT!
Gary Z 9:51AM (8/07/2007)
Yeah, I've got a 4.7L V8 in my Sequoia. You'd figure they could make such a tiny engine get better fuel economy but that 5.7L is leaps and bounds ahead.
Viv 6:10PM (8/06/2007)
Ahh please they guys are idiots. Anybody who says a tundra is better and more reliable than a silverado-F150 is a moron. I hope their check from the turds is cashed.
Reply
Matthew 6:13PM (8/06/2007)
So just because the Tundra doesn't come with an efficient ratio, it wins the tractor pull?? Wow. American car companies are really going to have to lower themselves if they want to compete with the likes of Toyota.
If anything, people flock to the highest axle ratio. It makes the car feel several times more powerful and they don't realize that it is going to kill their gas mileage. My mom falls for this every time.
Reply
MrMorix 6:18PM (8/06/2007)
People listen but they don't take this un"biased" information to heart. It's like when your parents tell you all about how they used to walk 10 miles uphill in the snow barefoot. We listen but we all know they are full of $hit!
...Next!
1337 8:41PM (8/06/2007)
And despite what you say is an inefficient ratio, it gets the best MPG of the group.
1337 8:46PM (8/06/2007)
The Tundra also tows the 7400 lb trailer to 60 MPH faster than all of the diesel 3/4 ton trucks.
1337 8:50PM (8/06/2007)
I would expect at least one more MPG out of a Tundra with a 3.73 rear end...perhaps 2 more MPG from a 3.55 or 3.08 (if Toyota sells such high ratios).
Guenther 7:55PM (8/07/2007)
1337- not necessarily. with the wide spread of the 6speed, a smaller rear gear would not necessarily help. This was probably part of the reason the 4.10 axle was dropped from the 5.7/6speed.
Darrell 6:16PM (8/06/2007)
Yawn... CR weights reliability pretty heavily, dunno why. Just because it doesn't work, doesn't mean I can't still look at it, or think about it while it's in the shop. It still can haul my ego around.
Reply
1337 8:23PM (8/06/2007)
CR does not consider reliability when doing the Ratings. However, reliability is considered in deciding whether to recommend a vehicle. If a vehicle's reliability scores below Good (white circle), the vehicle cannot be recommended.
Red Star 6:15PM (8/06/2007)
Somebody still takes CR seriously?
Reply
stephen leonhard 2:07PM (8/11/2007)
I rember one well educated good friend who actually read and believed this trash publication. I am convinced their auto testers failed to land jobs with the big three when they got out of school and have been getting even ever since!
spots 6:18PM (8/06/2007)
What a bunch of typical garbage coming from CR. I swear you could take an 89 Yugo, slap a Toyota or Honda nameplate on it, and they'd praise it from the mountaintops as the greatest car ever produced.
A couple years ago, they did a report on the Civic- the car they tested was a silver one. They also tested, as I recall, a Focus in the comparison. Even in the magazine, the shadowing and blotchiness in the paint job of the Civic was overtly apparent- yet they said not a word about it; instead, they criticized the Focus for having a bit of trash in the paint on a rocker panel.
I don't believe a word CR says; they have sake` in their veins apparently.
Reply
geo.stewart 7:40PM (8/06/2007)
Just like for uneducated IT managers in the 70s and 80s, they followed the belief that "no one got fired for picking IBM" it didnt matter that they were not the best, it was a known name from the past.
Well, in the 80s and 90s, Honda and Toyota did a good job of quality, and spent the late 90s and this decade hiding the slack.
CR is going with a historical safe bet rather than doing the research, which only validates those people who are going to go with a historical safe bet rather than research the best product.
CR is an appliance magazine and so when it comes to cars, they are going to pick the best appliance, not the best car or truck. And who builds a better yawner than the makers of the corolla?
Matthew 6:18PM (8/06/2007)
Doesn't the 6.0L 4:10 axled Silverado with AFM get the same mileage as the Tundra with a 5.7L? So if they admit that Toyota's gas mileage doesn't make them happy, then why did they let it win??
CR needs to grow some hair on their chest.
Reply
1337 10:08AM (8/07/2007)
CR only buys vehicles from dealer lots in order to have the same buying experience that a customer would have. No VortecMax 6.0L 4.10s may have been on lots. Additionally, the 5.3L is the most popular engine, and CR wants to test the vehicle that the average customer would buy. There is a method to their madness.