Consumer Reports slams Magnum

I find that their information is quite good, even superb in
certain areas. I do agree that agenda can bias such as when in a
response to a letter they tried to argue that big cars are safer
which violated many laws, including those of physics and
statistics. That I felt badly about since the crash stats showed
that when a little car meets a big car, the big car wins. But
this was about 10 years ago. That editor was just plain biased
and nonsensical and NHTSA's data also disproved his let's rewrite
the laws of physics (F=ma).

In regards to items like blood pressure devices, they were
excellent. Their results years ago are still valid and have been
verified, finally by other surveys.

I also find their reliability is on the money. I often had old
issues for old cars and sure enough, where something was terrible
was where I had problems. So it was good, on the money, and
forewarned me or at least I knew the car had problems with the
whatever. In fact, it was almost invaluable for old, used cars as
a rough guide. Where else to get data of 20 years ago that easily
and free almost?

If there were alternative sources, then fine, I could pool the
data, but often there is not anything out there.

There was a touch of we can't be wrong but I hope that changes.
When they dinged a particular Norelco water filter as dangerous,
they left out that a couple of years ago they had recommended it
or at least featured it. That's not good but naughty.

The things with the cars might be their hope that more small and
fuel efficient cars are a good thing. But I find that many women
who buy Japanese cars are delighted they do not have to have as
many repairs as their other cars, not necessarily American
either.

Their reviews of binoculars are pretty good. Their reviews of
digital cameras and wine were pretty good. And their reviews of
computers and peripherals are usually quite helpful and usually
in line with other reviews of the same subjects.

I wish they had more money so they could be independent of
themselves and not self-promoting, but it's rough out there. It's
so hard to find people willing not to want more money, even in
places like Consumer Reports. In fact, there was some sort of
to-do about the recent high salaries some managers were pulling
down.

It's much better than nothing and I just might subscribe again. I
stopped with the water filter and the car thing. That irritated
me and disappointed me greatly.

 

I like CR and subscribe to it, but sometimes I do feel there's a li'l bias.
On the magnum comparison, for example, they said in the body of the text
that the braking was "unimpressive", yet one or two other vehicles in the
same comparison that got the same or worse stopping distance had either no
remark or said that braking was very good in their descriptions.

 

A little bias???? Typical of this so-called consumer witchhunt, I mean
watchdog, magazine.

 

CR, IMO, views cars as appliances - no emotion. Believe me, for some of us
there's a lot of emotion involved in choosing a car.

 

I disagree. A lot of their ratings are obviously based on emotion and
opinion, not on performance and specifications. They often comment
about US makers using "cheap looking" interior plastic as compared to
the Japanese. I drive a number of different cars (rentals due to
business travel), and the Japanese and Korean cars are every bit as
cheesy in the interior as the American cars. I can't for the life of me
understand this comment about interiors. It is completely emotion and
opinion based.

And their reader surveys are entirely opinion based. I place a lot more
faith on people like Popular Mechanics who do longer term tests on
selected cars in real world driving. The only problem here is that they
can only test a handful of cars and even their "long" term test barely
gets through the break-in period. I've only owned one Japanese car, a
1984 Honda Accord that I bought new ... based largely on CR's ratings.
That year, as I recall, the Honda was rated second to the Camry. I
visited the local Toyota dealership and the sales drone was so arrogant
that I left within 15 minutes and have never returned. The Honda
dealership was much more customer friendly and I ended up buying.

Other than a failed Schrader valve which caused the AC to fail (fixed
under warranty), a rear window leak (worked on during warranty, but
never completely fixed despite gobs of sealant), and a failed cruise
control (fixed under a recall), the car wasn't bad for the first
55-60,000 miles. If you only kept a car that long, you'd rave about the
Accord. Well, I keep cars a minimum of 100K. This car began to
systematically self-destruct around the 60,000 mile mark. It needed new
rotors and drums because the originals had rusted so badly they couldn't
be turned. It needed new struts all around. I needed a new exhaust
system including catcon (VERY expensive, over $1000 as I recall and this
is for a car that cost just over $10,000 brand new). And there were
several other small issues I can't remember any longer. After putting
probably more than two grand into the car between 55K and 65K, I figured
this car should be good for at least another 60K. Wrong. The engine
started making a light tapping sound around 70K. I took it to the
dealer and they said it was normal. It got progressively worse so I
took it back again thinking maybe it needed the valves adjusted (this
car didn't have hydraulic lifters) as it was nearing the next round
(every 15K as I recall). The mechanic still didn't think the noise was
unusual but pulled the valve cover at my insistence. The cam and
lifters were shot. At least 1/16" was worn from EVERY cam lobe and
every lifter pad. Another $600 or so.

This is the sort of thing that CR doesn't catch because they only cover
5 model years on their survey (at least that last time I submitted one
that was the case). My Accord was 6 years old when the engine
self-destructed. Even though I still subscribe to CR as I find useful
information there, I haven't returned a survey in probably 10 years.


Matt


Matt

 

CR, IMO, views cars as appliances - no emotion. Believe me, for some of us

[snip]

CR seems to be overwhelmed when evaluating higher technology products. A
number of years ago I checked out some evals they did on some computers. Their
level of computer knowledge was laughable, and of course their ratings were
useless.

They do a good job on washers, dryers and toaster ovens though.

 

How do you know?

Are you a washer, dryer and toaster oven expert?


Matt

 

How do you know?

Yes, I believe I am ! Unless 15 years experience in the biz isn't enough of a
qualification, in which case no, I am not.

 

i love the magnum and i'm buying a red r/t next week i don't care what c
r says about it mopars are great cars . ( HEMI )

 

The look grows on you. I'm in the market for a larger family car to
replace my A4, so I'll have to give the Magnum a serious look, though
I'd been leaning towards an Audi S4 Avant. I hadn't driven anything
with the new hemi until last week when I tried out someone else's 300C.

Cheers,