Filed under: Etc., Tech, Videos
VIDEO: Autoblog goes behind the scenes at Consumer Reports
Another installment of Consumer Reports annual automotive issue is close at hand. The yearly car issue crowns Top Picks in a variety of categories as well as offering up some solid alternative choices. Last year, we had the opportunity to peek behind the curtain at CR's huge auto test facility in Connecticut, and we were psyched to find out there's real car guys behind all those filled-in circles. Here's a sample of what CR's crew is likely up to right now, expending a huge amount of labor on careful research and evaluation. In a couple of months, we'll be able to raise a fuss when CR yet again passes over our favorite car and anoints something far more reliable and better built their favorite. Oh well, there's always next year.
click through to see the video
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Poopy Head 1:36PM (1/06/2008)
Too bad that a majority of these tests are dependent on the wet traction of the tires. A Suburban with Aquatread tires would probably handle better than a Porsche on summer slicks in those conditions. It amazes me how oblivious these idiots are.
How hard would it be to make an objective test?
On their "headlight test", how hard would it be to put photo sensors on the signs to measure light levels?
This video just makes me further realize how worthless the CR reports have become.
Reply
tankd0g 4:59PM (1/06/2008)
These tests happen over the course of days or weeks. All weather conditions are likely to be encountered. In fact they probably try to get a mix.
Joe 6:18PM (1/06/2008)
The sad part about this is many people base their decision on CR to make a choice on which car to buy. CR has cause the domestics a lot of lost customers through the years. I wished they could be sued and put out of business.
psarhjinian 8:14AM (1/07/2008)
@Joe
I'm really sorry that CR didn't let the domestics off with marking total crap for twenty-five years. They should have fudged the numbers to make them look better, instead of objectively reporting the data they collect.
Shame on them for not supporting your favourite brand.
Alex Nunez 1:42PM (1/06/2008)
This was a DEMONSTRATION of how they go about their auto test regimen, not the actual testing. The day we were there, it was just wet out, and they had to work with what Mother Nature gave them.
Reply
dpb! 3:14PM (1/06/2008)
Hey Alex, just wanted to say I always appriciate you getting into the comments. I think you clarify things more than other authors which really helps!!!
Keep up the good work!
dpb
Ken 6:28PM (1/06/2008)
Later, they'll probably test another vehicle on a dry day and give the first vehicle, that was tested on a wet day, a bad rating. I don't trust them because their results are usually so pro Japanese.
JGN 1:46PM (1/06/2008)
I've always found that CR is a reliable source of information when you want to make an informed purchase decision.
CR is derided continually because their objective approach to testing has confirmed what most consumers have come to know, and that's mostly to do with domestic vehicles lagging behind foreign automakers in a variety of aspects.
It's a shame that people would deride CR rather than expect domestic automakers to do better than they have been doing. An all too loyal customer bas was what lead domestic automakers to get lazy and outdated in the first place.
Rather than spread the same old propaganda about CR, people should appreciate the service they offer and demand more out of domestic automakers. Even without CR, consumers are moving away from domestics because they just don't cut it right now.
I like when they present their results in a video format though. It's hard to deny that the Jeep Wrangler and the FJ Cruiser clearly outperformed the Ford model. Even then, it doesn't seem to matter because some people are undyingly loyal and unscrupulous about defending their chosen brand.
Reply
KCurtis 1:59PM (1/06/2008)
Thank you!
I agree 110%
I found this to be the best part of the writeup. lol
"In a couple of months, we'll be able to raise a fuss when CR yet again passes over our favorite car and anoints something far more reliable and better built their favorite."
Alex Nunez 2:09PM (1/06/2008)
JGN, just to clarify: this is video that Dan shot himself at the event and subsequently produced himself. The package you just watched was not CR-furnished. They just had us on hand for the media day.
Dan Roth 2:17PM (1/06/2008)
It should be noted that the Sport Trac that climbed the rock hill was the only one of the three not shod in off-road tires. I'd say it did pretty well given it's street rubber and less hardcore disposition.
JGN 2:43PM (1/06/2008)
Thanks for the reply, I read the article, but it's basically the test that these vehicles undergo right? If CR doesn't do this, it would probably be a good idea, given that people could go to their website and see the vehicles undergoing the tests themselves. I am sure they would get a lot more people paying for access when they could see stuff like that directly on the website.
I'm not entirely convinced that offroad tires would have made a huge difference for the Ford, it seemed to be bottoming out quite a bit. Without checking, I'm guessing it doesn't have the clearance of the Jeep or the Toyota.
Dan Roth 3:57PM (1/06/2008)
Yeah, the Sport Trac doesn't have the ground clearance that the FJ or the Wrangler have, but look at the mission of the vehicle vis a vis the Jeep and Toyota. The Sport Trac is not as hardcore an offroader and it suffered a tire deficiency.
The demonstrations they showed us that day were illustrative of their testing methods, but they're certainly far more thorough and scientific than they were on the track day.
As for the commentary about lighting measurements - if you watched until the end of the clip, she did make a point of saying that they're moving some of the measurements to an instrumented test inside. We got to see some of that, as well, but it didn't make the cut.
Say what you want about CR, but their numbers largely hold up, and their car test staff knows what they're talking about.
JGN 5:19PM (1/06/2008)
Dan,
if you read my posts you'll realize that I first defended CR,a nd then mentioned that I think taping the trials for broadcast is a great idea. I've been a subscriber to CR for years now.
By taping the trials, people can watch the testing these vehicles go through and can far more easily see how each vehicle performs, making it more difficult for people to accuse CR of bias. Besides that, there is a lot of entertainment value is watch vehicles put through their paces, especially when the vehicles are being challenged like that.
I thought you guys were actually being fair to Ford by mentioning the tires it was using. Beyond that, it's clear that the Ford needs more than just offroad tires to be competitive with the Jeep and the Toyota. The Ford may outshine the Jeep and Toyota in other areas though, I am aware of that.
Either way, I think that showing the trials and testing is a great idea. I would definitely watch them if they were posted here, or on the CR website. It's just that much better to see side by side comparisons being performed by the vehicles in real time.
Dick 6:33PM (1/06/2008)
I owned many vehicles in my lifetime. Some were Japanese and some were American. The worst vehicles I've owned were Japanese. If you push them hard, they break easily. With the American cars I did not have that problem.
Mike 6:44AM (1/07/2008)
CR lost all credibility with me when they announced that the toyota camry and other vehicles would no longer be "AUTOMATICALLY" recommended.
Shows that there were lapses of tests because they assumed these vehicles had no problems.
Bias or laziness?
jJack 8:47AM (1/07/2008)
You have to be blind if you don't notice CR being bias. Of the ten best cars last year, they picked all Japanese cars. I know this can't be accurate. In case your wondering about what I know about cars. Cars has been my career all my life.
FThorn 2:14PM (1/06/2008)
Their tests are targeted toward mindless point-A to point-B, humdrummer, car handling stuff. They cannot begin to test/report in a worthwhile manner on the intangibles of sports cars, trucks, etc. Quirky, lovable characteristics that stylists can impart on a car are lost on these guys. A quirk stands out...it must be smashed; they'd say. A car should also never be a status symbol to these guys. Boring.
Reply
Dan Roth 2:18PM (1/06/2008)
I think you'd find the exact opposite were you to actually talk with the folks at CR. They're car people, through and through. Their MO is different than the buff books, and apparently some people don't like that. Whatevs.
bduddy 4:54PM (1/06/2008)
Apparently you don't realize that CR is not an enthusiast magazine. I am somewhat worried about your general knowledge.