In article >, SMS > wrote:
>Doug Miller wrote:
>> In article
> >, Orval
> Fairbairn > wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>
>>>> While Consumer Reports is a very good and unbiased source, they do tend
>>>> to emphasize safety and reliability over other factors.
>>
>> Consumer Reports "unbiased"? ROTFLMAO! You've got to be kidding. Their bias
>> against *all* American-made vehicles has been well-known for decades. They
> got
>> caught with their pants down in the late 70s or early 80s when they rated the
>
>> Dodge Colt as significantly less reliable than the Mitubishi model to which
> it
>> was identical in every respect. That's the most blatant example I'm aware of,
>
>> but far from the only one. Unbiased my foot.
>
>What you don't understand is that the reliability ratings in Consumer
>Reports come from their subscribers that fill out surveys, it's not CR's
>opinion except when they're projecting reliability on new models based
>on similarity with key components of earlier models.

CR's surveys are entirely self-selected, which right off the bat makes them
completely invalid from a scientific standpoint.

>
>There have been several times when essentially the same vehicle,
>marketed by different companies, have had different reliability ratings,
>and they'll note that anomaly in their survey results.

They note that *now*. They didn't used to, not until after they got caught
with their pants down on the Colt and a few others.

> It's easy to
>understand that a typical Mitsubishi buyer may be very different from a
>typical Dodge buyer when it comes to how well they maintain the car.

Or how they respond to surveys.
>
>CR has often rated U.S. made vehicles very highly, and has often rated
>imported vehicles poorly.

"Often" is not the correct spelling of "sometimes".