FDR wrote:
>
> "Pete C." > wrote in message
> ...
> > FDR wrote:
> >>
> >> "Pete C." > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > FDR wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> "Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in message
> >> >> . ..
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Del Cecchi" > wrote in message
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>> What makes you say that? They'd rate the Honda Civic better than
> >> >> >>> a
> >> >> >>> Lamborghini because it has longer intervals between tuneups.
> >> >> >> Why not? By any rational standard the Honda Civic is superior to a
> >> >> >> Lamborghini. The Lamborghini excels in driving very fast and
> >> >> >> looking
> >> >> >> good.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > But you don't buy a Lambo for practical reasons. CR thinks we should
> >> >> > all
> >> >> > drive Honda or similar autos.
> >> >>
> >> >> People that buy CR mag buy it for the practicality/value info. If
> >> >> you're
> >> >> into a Lambo then you'll be buying a gearhead type mag.
> >> >
> >> > CR does not contain (valid) practicality/value info. Their "findings"
> >> > are distorted, biased and not in any way based on valid scientific
> >> > testing or analysis.
> >> >
> >> > Pete C.
> >>
> >> Hey, I read them and don't agree with them many times, but what do you
> >> exactly think they should do that would meet your standard of testing?
> >> AS
> >> for cars, like many reviews they are opinions.
> >
> > I've read enough of them to decide that they provide little or no
> > information that is of value to me.
> >
> >> Firm ride, small back seats,
> >> cheap plastic knobs aren't something you need to do a scientific analysis
> >> of.
> >
> > Actually all three can indeed have more valid analysis done.
> >
> > Firm ride relative to what exactly? An average car would be mush
> > compared to a high end sport model, but that same car would be firm
> > compared to some "luxury" mush model.
>
> I think firm is quite self explanatory.

I think it can be tested more objectively.

>
> >
> > Small back seats for whom? A pro football player? An average teenager?
>
> It's usually followed by the saying only a child could sit in the rear with
> any comfort, ala the Camaro.

For cars like that, the back seat is most suitable for small rodents.

>
> >
> > Cheap plastic knobs? What defines a cheap plastic knob vs. a non-cheap
> > plastic knob? Last time I looked I saw virtually no non-plastic knobs on
> > any car regardless of price (in the "sane" range, I didn't look at
> > "exotics").
>
> You surely can tell the difference in feel between a luxury plastic knob and
> something on a cheap car. I think you're being particularly picky about
> these points that I would find self-evident.

What might this difference in feel be? ABS feels like ABS whether in a
Hyundai or a Mercedes.

>
> >
> >> Reliability ratings are another thing entirely, since it's up to the
> >> consumer to provide feedback on problems.
> >
> > The best source for reliability information is warranty claim data.
> > Outside of warranty period it's very difficult to get good data on a
> > large enough sample to be valid.
>
> Do all or most car companies bother to provide this information to a
> magazine?

Not to an magazine with the reputation of CM, however the Powers stuff
is largely based on this data.

>
> >
> >> To do any scientific analysis
> >> would require that they gather x number of cars, drive them y number of
> >> miles, and i z number of conditions. Highly impractical. Motorweek
> >> tests
> >> one car over 15000 miles but that's nowhere scientific either.
> >
> > They don't need to test each one themselves, a formal reporting
> > arrangement with consumers would work. They would need to track each
> > vehicle from purchase to either a loss/sale/end of test period.
>
> Isn't that what they basically do now? Send surveys out and create a
> database.

A survey not the same as formal tracking from purchase to loss/sale/end,
tracking based on the submission of invoice copies, not just comments.

Pete C.