Consumer Report's Bulb Test

The recent issue tests after market bulbs, including the GE NightHawk and
the Sylvania bulbs. Their results were inconsistent depending upon the car
lamp in question.

I found that the NightHawk did give me a boost in my 04 Town and Country and
the GE/Toshiba inferred bulbs improved my 98 RAV4 much more than my PT
Cruiser. Perhaps there is something about improvements being lamp specific.

Richard.

 

They also just took the bulb makers' word regarding DOT compliance ("All
the tested bulbs claim DOT compliance") without checking -- shame on them.
Had they checked, they'd likely have found that the APC Plasma Ultra White
bulbs are very definitely *not* compliant in several important ways.

They've made a lot of noise regarding their newly implemented headlamp
"tests" over the last year or so. Typical CR selfgratulatory crapola. I
won't bother rehashing the exact reasons why their headlamp "tests" are
largely bogus; I've posted the analysis before in this forum and others.
It's not just a question of "Dan Stern doesn't agree with Consumer
Reports"; it's much more serious than that: Many of their assumptions and
recommendations regarding headlamps are just plain nonsense fabricated out
of the same whole cloth that allows CR to consider themselves expert in
everything from red wine to oil filters to washing machines to insurance
policies.

DS

 

Consumer Reports is very prone to letting their agendas override their
objectivity.



Suzuki suffered major difficulties with its image after Consumer Reports
magazine's famous, or infamous, claim in 1988 that the Samurai was prone to
rollover. The Suzuki Samurai small SUV enjoyed enormous popularity and
sales in the mid-1980's until the CR article was published.



Consumer Reports had stated that the Samurai "easily rolls over in turns"
and that it was "likely to roll over during a maneuver that could be
demanded of any car at any time". U.S. government studies actually showed
that the Samurai's rate of rollover was similar to that of other SUV's.
Sales plunged and Suzuki eventually stopped production of the Samurai in
1995.



Suzuki filed lawsuit in 1996 for product disparagement after Consumer
Reports magazine rehashed the old test results in yet another article.
Suzuki had pursued their $60 billion lawsuit ever since 1996 in the position
that the Consumer Reports "not acceptable" rating had caused sales to
plunge, tarnished the company's image and set back the company's brand in
the US for a decade. Suzuki went so far as to specifically claim that
Consumer's Union had rigged the tests against the popular SUV to create
media attention in the midst of their fund-raising drive.



A trial judge threw out the suit, but the 9th District Court of Appeals
later reinstated it on the grounds that Suzuki had presented enough evidence
that CU published knowing falsehoods in their article, and the Supreme Court
in 2003 refused to prevent the case from going forward. Suzuki's managing
counsel had stated that "The evidence will clearly show that, rather than
driving all the vehicles the same, CU singled out the Suzuki Samurai and,
through stunt-like steering, intentionally made it tip up -- all to support
CU's pre-determined story line, only after the Samurai received the best
possible rating on the test CU had used for the past 15 years." The court
noted that at the time CU initially criticized the Samurai, CU had just
purchased a new building and therefore "needed to boost its revenues to
complete its capital campaign." The court concluded that this "evidence of
financial motive dovetails with the evidence of test-rigging."



In a similar lawsuit by Isuzu against CU regarding their Isuzu Trooper
receiving a similar "not acceptable" rating, Isuzu provided evidence that
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and its British
counterpart rejected Consumer Reports' rollover tests as unscientific on the
grounds that they were subject to driver influence. Isuzu was charging that
the consumer group falsified certain test data and concealed other
information. It charged also that a magazine staffer began writing the
article before the tests were concluded.



Just before the 1996 Trooper tests, the NHTSA rejected the consumer
organization's petition to establish rollover standards. Isuzu's lawyers say
the article's timing was more than coincidence; it was an effort to generate
media attention for CU and their latest cause.



Consumer Reports counsel tried to turn the case into a First Amendment
issue, essentially intimating that even if the tests were biased, they
should be protected from a product disparagement claim because the
organization is part of the press, and asserting that they should have
received a summary judgment on that basis. CU finally compromised their
statement in a settlement late last year to clarify that the rollover
tendency was only seen in their somewhat extreme emergency rollover test and
was not applicable to routine driving conditions.



Consumer's Union added that "CU's use of the adverb 'easily' may have been
misconstrued and misunderstood" and that "CU never intended to state or
imply that the Samurai easily rolls over in routine driving conditions."

 

I put Nighthawks in my vehicle and they are indeed brighter than the
standard issue lamps.

Also, at Wallyworld, a 2-pack of Nighthawks is around $10 cheaper than a
2-pack of Silverstars. And Nighthawks have clear glass while
Silverstars have that sickly blue cast.

Daniel, you once mentioned that bulbs with an "axial" filament (running
the length of the bulb) are superior to those with the filament running
across the width. Why is this?

 

Fascinating but you forgot to post the part where both automakers gave up in
their attacks on CU and both cars sucked compared to increased competition
and that is why they stopped selling.

 

What objectivity? They make a lot of noise about how objective they are
because they don't accept advertising, but that is a disingenuous
nonsequitur, for every issue of CR is cover-to-cover advertisement for
CU's many produts and services, and they use the same marketeering
psychology every other advertising company uses. It's just they don't
accept advertising *from other people*.

They did the same thing to Audi with the "unintended acceleration"
crapola.

DS

 

1) In rectangular lamps, there's much more available light and much less
light wasted on the floor and ceiling if the filament is axial rather than
transverse.

2) In a parabolic reflector, the unmodified beam from an axial filament is
a round spot, while from a transverse filament it's a more-or-less
rectangular "bow tie" shape. The round spot is easier to manipulate to
direct light where it's needed while keeping light away from where it's
not. That is: A round spot is easier to focus than a horizontal kinda-bar.
It's also much easier to control glare and upward stray light when
starting from a round spot.

There are some applications in which transverse filaments are a better
choice (tall strip-shaped reflectors, some kinds of fog lamps, certain
kinds of high beam/"driving" lamps).

DS

 

Made for some excellent bargains on the used car market.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Art,

On another matter. Does the 300M give you any back support? I'm thinking of
selling mine since my back is killing me.

Ken

 

Mine is ok. But ours only has 51000 miles on it so the seat might be in
better shape than yours if you have higher mileage.

My wife just bought a hybrid Accord so we will be getting rid of the 300M.
It was a great ride but she wanted something smaller for parking at work.
And yes, I know the hybrid feature is a complete waste of money. And it
doesn't have auto lights, auto dimming rearview mirror or memory seats. And
the passenger gets a manual seat. And no spare tire (patching kit and
compressor instead). But it sips gas and is fast and a heck of a lot nicer
then the Prius.

 

Maybe Audi should have moved the gas pedal over a few inches.

 

Or required their customers to have an IQ above 70 before selling them a
car.


Matt

 

Thank you for the answer. My vehicle uses #9007 bulbs which have axial
filaments.

 

Heh, I can top that:

LABEL THEM like a Model T's 3 pedals.
S on the brake pedal for Stop,
G on the gas pedal for Go.

Along with a warning sticker on the dash telling the potential
driver that they are responsible for hitting the correct pedal.
There's only two now.

 

Right, so you couldn't heel and toe, ruining the driver-friendly
ergonomics that is one of the big reasons that people who enjoy driving
tend to buy German cars? Then they'd be just like a F*rd or Ch*vy.

nate

 

The Samurai was first made in 1982 and within the next few years was selling
in Europe, Asia, Australia, and elsewhere. Suzuki introduced it into the US
in 1985 as a 1986 model. Starting with a mere 1200 trucks imported per
month, sales increased exponentially to 8000 vehicles per month and Suzuki
quickly found themselves with 47,000 Samurais sold by the end of their first
year. Not only was it the top-selling convertible in the United States, but
it also captured the best first-year sales record of any Japanese car
company. In 1987, the year before the CR article, sales were 81,349. And
you say the Samurai stopped selling because "it sucked"? I guess all those
people were buying the vehicle totally unaware that it "sucked"?

After the 1988 Consumer Reports article, annual sales dropped to only 5,041
within a year. Did all those people suddenly become aware that it "sucked"?
How?

Consumer reports was financially over-extended in 1988 and they simply
created a big story at Suzuki's expense, exploiting customers' worst fears
and creating a marvelous marketing tool for them, and based on the evidence
the courts were agreeing.

Suzuki pursued the case from 1996 to 2004, but it's hard to win any case
against a nonprofit organization. At least Suzuki got a compromised
statement from CR essentially taking back their claim that the vehicled
easily rolled over in turns.

 

Please quote that statement of retraction. I've never seen it.

 

Hey... now you're hitting *really* close to home.. and I like to drive !!!

 

Yep, a very quiet statement, full of weasel words, and long after the
damage was done.

 

True story: I was driving south on I87 (The Northway) while listening to
NPR. They had a story on about how the Suzuki Samari was prone to roll over.
Just ahead of me on the grass was a rolled over Samari. With this kind of
fate you would think I could win the lottery; but noooo.

Richard.