Just days after releasing their "best cars" list for 2005 - cars that are " standouts across the board for performance, versatility, reliability, safety, and interior fit and finish" according to Consumer Reports - the magazine had to recall its list, published in the April issue. The problem? Their top pick in the small sedan category rated "poor" in side impact tests, along with 13 of the other 15 cars in the category.

What an embarassment for Consumer Reports! Obviously no one should ever trust their ratings again. Better to stick to Japanese car magazines, like http://www.carmag.co.jp/index.html!

 

I get Consumer Reports. I was wondering why they pretty much quit mentioning the S2000 at all. They still have it in the reviews but when it comes to fun to drive, they give it to the Subaru. When they compare sports cars they don't mention the S2000. They loved it when they reviewed it and it's in every issue as an ad for the magazine, with a guy standing next to a red one.

 

from CR's web site... (doesn't make them any less effective in what they do IMO):

Consumer Reports removes Ford Focus as Top Pick for small sedans
Six other vehicles no longer recommended because of crash test results.

Consumer Reports has removed the Ford Focus as its Top Pick for small sedans because it performed poorly in insurance industry crash tests that were announced on Sunday.

Two other small cars that received favorable ratings in Consumer Reports' April Auto Issue, the Hyundai Elantra and Mazda3, also are no longer recommended by the magazine because of poor performance in the new side-impact crash tests, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Consumer Reports has also removed four other vehicles from its recommended list because of their performance in IIHS side-impact crash tests. They are the Honda Element, Mitsubishi Outlander, and Suzuki Grand Vitara/XL-7 small SUVs and the Nissan Altima sedan. (The Altima was tested without its optional side- and head-protection air bags.)

In all, 14 of 16 small sedans received poor ratings in the latest IIHS crash tests. If you're buying a small sedan, Consumer Reports suggests that you consider the Toyota Corolla with the optional side-air-bag package. With the optional air bags, the Corolla achieved acceptable results in the new crash tests; without the air bags, the Corolla performed poorly. The Corolla earned a very good score in our road tests, and has had excellent reliability and excellent overall ratings in other crash tests.

Consumer Reports doesn't perform its own crash tests. It recommends models based on the following requirements:

They must score well in Consumer Reports' extensive road tests, conducted at our 327-acre auto test facility.
They must have shown average or better reliability based on the magazine's annual subscriber survey.
They must have performed adequately if included in a government or insurance-industry crash test, or in a government rollover test. Not all vehicles, however, are included in these tests.
IIHS began testing vehicles for side-impact crashes in 2003, although this was the first time that small cars were included. The test simulates a vehicle being struck in the side at 31 mph by a large vehicle the size and weight of an SUV or pickup. The test differs from the government's side-impact test, which simulates a vehicle being hit in the side by a vehicle the size and weight of a family sedan. The cars that Consumer Reports recommended performed adequately in the government's side-impact test.

Of the 16 small sedans in the test, only the Chevrolet Cobalt and the Toyota Corolla earned acceptable ratings. They were equipped with head-protecting side-curtain air bags and had well-designed body structures. Versions of the Cobalt and Corolla without side air bags earned a poor rating. Consumer Reports does not recommend the Cobalt because of insufficient reliability data. More information about the IIHS test results is available at the institute's Web site, www.hwysafety.org.

It is not unusual for vehicles to earn low grades in a new crash test. In 1985, only about 30 percent of the vehicles tested in the government's frontal crash test achieved high ratings. By 2001, some 90 percent scored highly. Similarly, no small sedan earned a good rating in the insurance institute's offset-frontal crash test when it was introduced in 1997, according to Adrian Lund, the IIHS chief operating officer. Now, almost every small car earns a good rating in the frontal test, he says.

Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, believes that side air bags and head protection should be standard equipment. The poor showing of so many small sedans in this latest crash test illustrates an urgent need for better protection against side impacts by larger vehicles.

We will continue to review our recommendations to incorporate ongoing crash-test findings.

 

I wouldn't completely dismiss Consumer Reports just yet. Every publication or report is based on information available at the time, so it is understandable that with new information, some of the ratings would change -- expecially since CR does not do its own crash tests. I think CR does provide some useful auto reliability data of its own.

 

Consumer Reports is not perfect, but I also feel they fill a niche that is generally ignored by the mainstream auto mags: Reliability and Cost to Own.

I've also been surprised (and impressed) that they have recently been much more open to allow "fun to drive" as a minor criteria for consideration

 

Sorry, didn't mean for people to take the post seriously ... it was just meant as a humorous counterpoint to the "GT Recall" thread.

I do agree that small vehicles really shouldn't be expected to survive being slammed into by a Hummer at full speed. I would note that they dumped the original side impact test because it was failing too many SUV - they were rolling over, and we all know that rollover accidents never happen to SUVs!

 

canberra, when it comes to CR and auto's, the thing I used to appreciate (back when our local library carried the books) was how they rated the reliability of the cars over the years based on readers input. I found that in almost every case my personal experiences or knowledge of others when it came to car experiences would parallel their findings, so I felt CR was very accurate in pointing out flaws. As for the whole safety issue, I think any fool knows that bigger wins but sometimes it's interesting to find out that some of the safer cars are not always the most expensive given relative sizes. In the end, I take cute over safe any day. . . heck, that's why I married my wife!

 

Give Consumer Reports credit - many other publications would turn a deaf ear to new information that contradicts their earlier writings.

 

Toyota will soon have side air bags, head protection and tire pressure monitors as standard equipment on All their cars and SUVs.

They are one of the few companys that listen to their Customers.

 

Do you get free helmets with each car?