LoneStarLizzard

CR claims that it is unbiased in its assessments of new vehicles because it does not accept any finanical support (whether i the form of advertising, contributions or otherwise) from the auto makers/dealers. [interesting, because CR's receipt of auto industry finanical support would comprise only one source of bias - financial dependency.] But even if CR does not get financial support from the auto industry, it does never-the-less have a bias: specifically a bias against US-made vehicles (and a corresponding bias for all things Japanese). For years that bias was justified - due to the shoddy design and build quality of our domestic brands - particularly when compared to Japanese imports which were similarly priced but which exhibited far fewer defects. Those days are over, and have been for the last 4 or 5 years. Today's Ford, GM and, to a lesser degree Chrysler, products have caught up with Japan Inc and, in some ways passed them. And yet CR continues to have a Japanese-car bias. I sense this "Japan Inc." bias is present within the CR employee staffers who oversee the car ratings processes, which in turn tends to cause them to disbelieve any positive assessments of Ford or GM cars. I sense this most strongly as I see the increasing number of recalls involving Japanese cars, yet the CR foks continue to rate those recalled vehicles as having the highest quality and reliability. By definition, we Forum members are car enthusiasts. But I suspect CR staff are not - I sense they live in urban New England cities where travel by car is more a chore than a joy, and their driving limited to trips to the store. Where I live, cars need (1) a great air conditioining system, (2) engines with sufficient power to safely accomodate 20+ thousand annual miles of 70+ mph freeway usage, and (3) interior and exterior styling that befits a vehicle in which the driver lives for upwards of 3 hours per work day. That ain't Japan Inc. CR needs to wake up, or lose its relevance - a majority of the US population lives outside of New England. [by the way, you'd be surprised at the number of New Englanders who have never travelled outside of their little corner of our country.] CR's preferences for things Japan simply reflects the organization's inherant regional biases (New England and, for styling purposes, California). And that bias begets an institutional arrogance (we know what's best for you, even though we've never walked in your shoes) that blinds CR to any information to the contrary. Do I use the CR reports? Yes, but primarily to look at the long-terms trends in "worse than average" quality within vehicle subsystems (e.g. engine, electrical, transmission, air conditioning, etc.). Do I pay any attention to CR's driving reports on new vehicles? No, because CR doesn't employ the types of drivers who can give feedback relevant to any type of driving other than "New England urban." Just my thoughts based on (i) 45 years of driving between 25 and 30 thousand miles per year (during which time I have purchased well over 50 automobiles) and (ii) over 20 years of reading CR. The LoneStarLizzard