Funny, but I have been a follower of CR's auto reviews for over 30 years, but for the last 5 years I began to wonder how they lost their way with heavily biased results. One cannot take their reports on face value anymore, but you have to read between the lines. For example, they are in love with Subaru even though the cars do not measure up to their ratings when you get behind the wheel. Second is their hatred of anything Chrysler. Read their recent rating on the dodge Journey and it was full of hatred statements and included a pants on fire lie about fuel economy stating it only got 16 mpg when the one I am currently driving is averaging 23 mpg over 13,000 mi. They raked it for having bad shifting even though the shifting is identical to every other car with a six speed auto trans. My experience is that the six speed transmissions all have quirky shifting due to having too many gear/load/accelerator position/speed choices. They appear to be a temporary patch on the way to CVT's that can take more torque and power. Always balance CR's ratings with those from other publications. The frequency of repair records are really great though and I have never been burned by buying a car with all red dots. If a car you want has black dots, go and talk to an INDEPENDENT auto mechanic for the truth.
Here Are The Cars That Consumer Reports Hates: Honda Civic, Toyota Prius C, And More
No wonder teens are increasingly disinterested in learning how to drive these days.
>>First, Consumer Reports does not hate any car,<< If you have been following the controversy over the CR Prius C review, and the subsequent blog post made by the writer of the review after another car review website criticized it for being too harsh, you might have a different opinion. I had always felt the same as you. CR's car reviews have always been very rigid. Every car had to live up to the same standard. Cost, size, or intended market had no effect on the rating. If a Corrola didn't ride as well as a Mercedes, it got down rated for that. Maybe not totally fair, but at least consistent.. You always knew where CR stood. The review writer revealed his bias in the blog, if you didn't already sense it in the actual review. Unfortunately, CR bought the Habenero color, which he referred to as that traffic cone orange. Apparently he didn't want be seen driving an orange car, and it "colored" is view point, so to speak. Be that as it may, the language used to describe the handling characteristics of the C was simple horrendous. Vague, imprecise, and contradictory. Positives couched in negative language, as if the guy simply could not bring himself to admit the car had any redeeming value. I can't argue with their opinion on the ride quality and road noise. Toyota definitely made some sacrifices there to save on weigh. But to now, as of the September issue, put the C on it's list of cars to avoid, which has traditionally been filled cars that had major design defects and terrible reliability and repair records, simply because they didn't like the ride and thought the interior looked cheap, is simply unforgivable, and a complete redefining of what "cars to avoid" means, with no explanation of why it changed. All I can suggest is that you read the review and judge for yourself.
First, Consumer Reports does not hate any car, that is just stupid. These particular cars are simply not recommended for the reasons stated in the article they wrote. The Civic for example is in fact just a poor imitation of the previous generation car. Too much cost cutting, too much decontenting. Their attempt to hide it failed miserably. It was not just Consumer Reports that made this discovery, but a number of auto publications as well.