Regarding CR...
I was a member some years ago.
I do not believe that any charges of bias can be made, and I think they will proscecute any alleged claims to that effect.
However, Their surveys are based on what the car owners considered as "important". Perhaps statisically it is not important, but, some might consider a lthe "K thunk" as a major flaw, while others might not even hear it.
Also, I would bet the sample size for any Hyundai is small, and the Azzy probably tiny, so a change in a few reports from owners might have a larger impact on their ratings.

OTOH, some years ago, the Mazda Tribute was rated very highly in all categories, while the Ford Explorer rec'd many black marks. The two vehicles were exactly the same,( except Mazda were only available in 2 doors), built on the same assembly line by the same people--yet the imported name plate got much better reports. You figure that one out.

They can't really prosecute charges of bias. It's too hard to prove or disprove, for one thing. Where they prosecute is if anyone uses their ratings in advertising.

How they word the key question is a more important factor, anyway. Letting each person decide whether a problem is serious enough to report opens the door wide for all sort of owner bias.

The Ford-Mazda thing could have just been a fluke. There have recently been huge differences been nearly identical Dodge and Chrysler products.

I've written about these issues here:

Anomalies within Consumer Reports' results

Consumer Reports survey critique

They require at least 100 responses to post a result. This is enough to give a fairly accurate overall rating--except for how the noise introduced by how the question is worded.

This post has been edited by mkaresh: Apr 7 2008, 12:06 PM

Well said,
And remember, CR, like Car and Driver, Motor Trend et al is simply a resource. Something to read and use as some input regarding your next car purchase. None of these reviews should ever be viewed as "THE TRUTH". They are the opinion of the reviewer. As the disclaimer on the EPA ratings says, " Your mileage may vary...."

Any review is the opinion of the reviewer.

Survey results are a little different. They come from owners. But flaws in the survey process can distort results, and the way results are reported can also distort perceptions.

This post has been edited by mkaresh: Apr 21 2008, 11:09 AM

Still have not received a reply to March 3 letter to the Automotive Editor of CR. Sent them a letter to editor yesterday to briefly raise the same questions regarding the Azera's "fall from grace" in one category, while remaining very high in others.
Also pointed out that they need to list the 50+ items they use to evaluate cars and how many points each received per category rather than a total number.
BTW, I am still having ride problems even with the new struts and the "clunk" has returned. Other than that, everything on the car is excellent.

CR tends to ignore the tough questions.

We posted a preliminary, asterisked result for the 2007 Azera. The repair rate is better than average.

I'd like to get rid of that asterisk and include other model years.

To view the results for 120+ models, and sign up to participate (if you haven't already):

TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results

Not very subtle promoting your own site, eh m8? :whistling:

Thanks, I appreciate it.

The next update is in August, with a preview for participants next month. I'm really hoping to have both the 2006 and 2007 in there, but it's going to be tight. For the 2008, we still need more owners to sign up before it can be included in the survey.

Additiional participants would really make a difference.

Vehicle reliability research

Returned from my first long trip, traveling from SW Florida to Tennessee to New Jersey and back to Florida with absolutely no complaints or problems. 29,000 miles now on the odo and still truck... er, Azera-ing... :grin:

:)

Azeras are really good cars for a long trip (Azera-ing) no? :amen:

Did you keep good and accurate records of your fuel economy or lack thereof? :whistling:

:liebe011:

This post has been edited by snaglepus: Jul 7 2008, 10:33 AM

No record as such, just noted that nearly pure interstate driving, maintaining about 75mph, yielded 28+ mpg and the period of forced zoom-zoom abstinance added a couple mpg...

:)
"the period of forced zoom-zoom abstinance added a couple mpg..." That'll do it for sure! :amen:
Your 28+ mpg sounds really reasonable to me, based on what we get driving ours on a trip.

Others report much higher MPG, but . . oh never mind! :innocent:

:)

This post has been edited by snaglepus: Jul 8 2008, 08:52 AM

Many different factors can influence MPG. The Fuel Economy Survey on my site includes some of the big ones. But one it doesn't include is wind speed and direction. With a strong tailwind you'll see a couple MPG better on the highway.

Now, on the reliability survey, we'll have results for the 2006 and 2007 Azera in a week or so. In both cases the results will be asterisked for marginal sample sizes.

I'd really like to ditch those asterisks with the next update, in November. Just need more participants.

Vehicle reliability research

I've called out Michael before as a self-promoter, and he obviously is. He does it pretty brazenly on multiple automotive forums all over the web.

But as others have since pointed out to me, he earns the goodwill to get away with it by making a lot of useful and readable posts, particularly his auto reviews on Epinions and on The Truth About Cars. So, I cut him more slack than I used to. Fella's gotta make a living somehow, and he's less obnoxious about it than a lot of other people.

This post has been edited by TLynn: Aug 7 2008, 10:16 PM

Thanks for the slack :)

That said, I'm not actually making a living from it...no revenue so far from the reliability research. The other things I'd like to clarify is that I'm promoting the research, not myself. And that some people might disguise their identity when making such posts, but I don't. There are companies whose entire business is to be a "regular Joe" for hire.

My primary motivation for conducting the research is that I wanted the information it provides, and no one else was providing this information.

When I want something to happen, and no one else is doing it, I do it myself. That's how it gets done.

As for the number of forums--if you want to have results for all cars, and each forum tends to cover just one model...

Now, on some forums a vehicle owner has been very helpful in getting the word out. In those cases, I'm glad to take a step back.

What we get out of it all: some results. The 2006 and 2007 are in the latest set. The sample sizes are marginal, so these results are asterisked, and only visible to members on the site. Since this forum has been helpful, I'll also post them here. The unit is number of successful repair trips per 100 cars per year, with average odometer in ().

2006 90 (19700) - a little worse than average

2007 14 (8400) - much better than average

With more participants I could provide more precise results and make them visible to guests as well as members. Including the 2008 and 2009 would also be nice.

The full set of results:

TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results

I don't see why anyone would find fault with mk. He is performing a service for all of us by taking the time to collect the data provided by us and collating and publishing it. It gives all of us an opportunity to see statistics about our vehicles that are apparently unbiased. More power to you mk! :beer:
Don

"When I want something to happen, and no one else is doing it, I do it myself. That's how it gets done."

Sounds like a useful "sig-tag" that can apply to many different forums and life experiences!... :clap: