- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by .
Viewing 4 reply threads
Viewing 4 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
In order to post or reply to comments, or manage your user settings
Not a member?
In order to post or reply to comments, or manage your user settings
I had read that if more than 3 percent of a certain car model has problems, Consumer Reports gives it a worse than average reliability rating..shouldnt it be more than say, 20 percent???
Thats a good point, but the problem is Consumer Reports rates relatively new cars, and as we all know, new things dont have much problems so if a new(by new I mean one or two year old which is also the range i think CR uses for their reliability ratings) car has 3% of its components already gone bad, when really nothing should have gone bad at this point in its life, than it probably will have 20% problems in 5 years. Lets say a new car has 1% problems in the first year or two, then it probably will have 10% problems in 5 years.
So because there rating relatively new cars they have to much more strict on their grading curve.
BTW, CR is an extremely unreliable , biased, and fickle source. Trust them at your own peril.
@Babersher True… Although I don’t know if it’s appropriate or accurate to use linear grading in determining part failure throughout a car’s life. Interesting question…
I dont think its a good method either, but thats how I think CR does it.
Another reason to not use CR.
CR is a biased kind of magazine. Majority of the domestic cars that they rate are unreliable and they rate foreign ones reliable since it’s their “favorite”