From: someone on
In article <C739488C.1454F%epmeyer50(a)gmail.com>, "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>On 11/27/09 8:38 AM, in article
>8dCdnWrqedf_eZLWnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com, "z(a)tink.net" <z(a)tink.net>
>wrote:
>
>> <someone(a)some.domain> wrote in message
>> news:%8CPm.279529$Jp1.66565(a)en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...
>>> In article
>>> <d9b14ab6-de86-4e4b-9b0f-b323f98f7409(a)r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> phaeton <blahbleh666(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This isn't new, either, suggesting that Toyota's troubles may be more
>>>>> of a developing pattern than a one-time aberration. Two years ago,
>>>>> before two-thirds of Detroit's automakers were tempered by the fires
>>>>> of bankruptcy, the editor of the ostensibly "Japanese-loving" Consumer
>>>>> Reports apologized to readers for recommending the problem-plagued
>>>>> Camry V-6.
>>>>>
>>>>> He also said the magazine had decided new Toyota models could no
>>>>> longer be given the benefit of the doubt -- or its prized
>>>>> "recommended" label. And Toyota's V-8 powered Tundra four-wheel drive
>>>>> pickup was labeled "unreliable" by the magazine, the unofficial Bible
>>>>> to discerning car and truck buyers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I always take everything Consumer Reports says with a grain of salt.
>>>
>>> yeah, a 50 mile square grain.
>>
>> I have my own theory about Consumer Reports Ratings, when the ratings are a
>> reflection of public response - who responds to the typical survey? Who
>> writes letter to the editor? Who calls a corporate complaint/compliment
>> line? Those who are not happy. So, in my own little not so humble opinion,
>> CR public response ratings are skewed to the negative.
>>
>
>That may be true, but every time I have looked up CR's ratings for any car
>I've owned over the past 40 years, the problems they predicted have matched
>exactly with what I experienced.
>
yeah, 20/20 hindsight.
while i don't totally disdain them, they are pretty one sided about a lot.
i suppose we could use the better than nothing argument.......