I agree 100% RP. That's why I let my subscription run out about 2 years ago to consumer reports. If it's a "BIG GAS GUZZLER" they tend to rip it. Take for example my beater '96 cavalier. Pushing 200,000 miles and no sign of letting up because of routine maintenance. Of course a cavalier isnt going to be as reliable as a honda civic. Most honda owners get their oil changed every 3000 miles and are at the honda dealer every 15,000 getting ripped on the 15,000 mile service. A higher percentage of people that buy imports maintain their cars better.

Not to mention the tree-hugging mentality of the writers at CR. They made me want to puke. What they dont mention is what the cost will be if you ever need to repair that hybrid auto.

 

I think that CR is ok, but they're not exactly saints, they have an agenda and bias just like everyone else. I have a funny feeling that if you stuck a Toyota of Honda nameplate on a Focus and distributed it to a buch of CR suscribers that it would get great ratings. I think that there are a lot of CR subscribers who buy exactly what CR says they should, and then they tell CR exactly what they read when they bought, a lot of which is true, but there is a cycle involved and IMHO I think that certain aspects good and bad get exagerated in a positive feedback sort of way. It's about the same as getting objective news from CNN or FoxNews. It's not that they don't tell the truth, they just grudgingly report good things about stuff they are inclined to dislike (and perhaps marginalize it a bit) and are eager as heck to shove the good things about their chosen stuff down your throat m(and sensationalize this stuff). Take it all with a grain of salt. Personally I believe that CR isn't as objective about automobiles as they are with a lot of other stuff.

 

This is exactly right. When I had my Acura and my old Honda, you were constantly reminded at 7500/15,000 mile intervals with the red "Maintenance required" light/thingy that comes on at those set intervals. People take their cars in and pay $300-400 for these fluid changes. Then every 30,000 miles they pay about $500-700 for the "big changes" (spark plugs, tranny fluid, maybe a timing belt).

Point #1 is these people take care of their cars. GM and Ford don't push these 7500/15,000/30,000 mile "tune up/services" as much as the imports do. Point #2 is that if you change fluids religiously at the intervals recommended by Honda/Acura/Toyota your car should last forever no matter what you drive.

 

I have been a subscriber to Consumers Reports for many years - mostly because when I need a new appliance including computer peripherals, I appreciate their reports. As a result of being a subscriber, I have also filled out many years of their "annual surveys" from which they derive most of their reliability data. With the exception of a 1998 Ranger, I had no reason to complain about a Ford product and did not do so.

And, I look at those charts and study them every year. I have always been happy with the way our Ford trucks have stacked up against the competition in their Consumer's Reports reliability ratings. For Consumers Report to be so negative about the new F-150 is actually a departure from their normal ratings for many years of F-150 ratings.

Frankly, I think Consumers Report has probably recognized a problem with new Ford product introductions - the Focus included. Way too many initial problems and yes, consumers will complain to them when asked.

Just like with the general population, Ford must find a way to find regain a reputation of reliable vehicles.

 

they give the f-150 all red ovals (good marks) on the independent colums for 2004. They say that the expected reliability is bad due to reported problems with drivetrain.( if i can remember right)

If you read this website I can see the reason for the negative. (vibe)

 

Every month I get Motor Trend, Car and Driver, Truck Trend (Motor Trend), and Autoweek. I read these mags from cover to cover with a grain of salt. I respect their professional opinions about various vehicles and automotive products, but at the same time I form my own opinions.
I have never liked Consumer Reports very much. I think they are more biased than the other mags. I will not however be like some of the people on this site and say that Ford is the best and the Jap cars and trucks suck, because it is just not true. However, I do not think all Jap cars and trucks are better made than American auto's just because CR says so. I think the automobile industry has come a long way and any car you buy now is made pretty damm well. This was not the case ten years ago.

Anyhoo, buy what you like for YOU, and take all things you read with a grain of salt!

BTW- Ford builds the best damm Pickup- Period!

 

Here is a list of problems I had with the 2002 Toyota Tundra Limited TRD Access Cab I owned from July 18 2002-August 22 2003. I bought this truck based on the opinion of Consumer Reports that rated it not only very high in quality but also spoke highly of it's driveability and utility.

1) Entire front brake system recalled from the spindles out, took 1-5 days to replace system for perpetually warped rotors.

2) updated brake system warped about a month after installation.

3) In dash cd changer jammed up twice and ate a couple of cds

4) abs light came on a few times

5) O2 sensor light

6) blown fuses in the 12volt power points

7) something under the dash started smoking and melting but was never located after several episodes of this.

8) It got 10 mpg no matter what kind of driving, city or highway, baby or flooring it.

Now a list of problem from my 2001 F-150 Lariat that was bought back as a lemon in 2002, hence why I bought the Tundra.

1) engine stalled at random

2) drivers side power window jumped in the track.

Summary, I would rather take my chances with Ford even though the Ford had a more severe problem, persay. I learned my lesson about Toyota's I still think they are good but the ones built in the USA are just as likely to have trouble as American cars. That's the way I see it.

Also, CS doesn't do a good job of reporting use as a truck, the F-150 would do twice what the Tundra would do as far as towing, etc.

I cancelled my subscription to CS about two years ago. You roll the dice everytime you buy a product. That's just the way it is.

 

I have suscribed to Consumer Reports since the early 70's. The best use for CR is to check out product features. I bought a 1977 Dodge Aspen with the Slant 6 as recomended by CR. The brakes on it were killers and the converter would get so hot it glowed. My wife was the principal driver and she refused to use it. Traded after a year for a 1978 BuicK Skylark which according to CR should have fallen apart. It did fall apart after 16 years and 300,000 miles (motor still goog but tranny shot). This included 2 years in the Navy and 4 years at Radford University with my sons. Remember also that CR never gave a positive nod to one of the most reliable and popular cars ever made - VW Beetle.

Recently, I purchased a 2002 Toyota Tacoma 4X4 Double cab which they highly recommended. The seat comfort at best was horrible and the seat fabric was terrible because if anything at all rubbed against it you would get a wear mark. Towing of even a 5 x 8 lawn trailer under load was an ordeal. The ride would "beat you to death" on a long trip and within a year they withdrew the recommendation because of poor handling. I traded the Tacoma on my 2004 F-150

Each year when the member rating form arrives most people toss it aside to fill in later or not at all - UNLESS - they have an issue and then they promptly fill in their gripe and send it in. This tends to over emphasize any problems both large and small and show as a higher percentage because most positive responses are not returned.

CR tends not to have a problem with recommendation flip-flop both pro and con. I am willing to bet that they will think the 05's will be top notch even though there are no significant changes.

Kenny

 

How I explained it is exactly how it works . Of all the people who receive the CR survey, how many of them that are happy with the product (ie the F150), take the time to fill it out? A very small percentage. On the other hand, the people who take the time to answer the survey that are unhappy with the product? The majority who are unhappy will take the time because they want everybody to know. This is a proven fact in marketing circles.

Going back to my original post, if someone is happy with a product they'll tell 10 people, if they are unhappy they'll tell 100 people....

 

It should be interesting to see if the poor rating improves with the '05 model year.

Scott

 

Consumer Reports a left wing rag. Enough palm grease and C/R would say “LEGO” is the best built truck with the fewest problems.

 

The new F150 has some issues with drive line vibration. We can't debate that. My 2004 FX4 vibrated so bad my foot would tingle from the harmonic vibration pulsating through the floor boards into the pedals. Thanks to the DSB my new 2005 Lariat is smooth as glass, so they all don't have this problem.

Ron

 

Your theory does not hold water.

If it were true then it would be true across all manufacturers, not just Ford so, the ratings would still be accurate.

 

I think that the key to CR's bias in their ratings is exactly that the subscribers are sent the questionaires. Their subscribers are not the average consumer. They are typically from the city and people who buy CR because they don't trust their own judgement when it comes to making decisions. They believe what they read or are told more readily than a typical consumer. They have heard and read that american products are inferior and so it must be so. They are not the typical american consumer. I'll bet that at least 70% of the CR subscribers drive imported vehicles.

 

I think I understand now. Someone buys a $35,000 Ford, can't decide if it has a problem, reads the magazine, goes back in time, fills in the questionaire, the Ford gets a black ball.