Grade F : Consumer Reports "New Car Preview 2010"

Ordinarily I'm a fan of "Consumer Reports" and though they've had a few mistakes in the past, their "New Car Preview 2010" sets a new low:

• Prius 2010 not included - "WHY A VEHICLE IS NOT IN THE RATINGS" (pp. 25) "The following models have been redesigned or extensively freshened since our last test. Most are scheduled to be included in future road-test reports in Consumer Reports. BMW 7 Series; BMW Z4; Buick LaCrosse; Cadillac SRX; Chevrolet Equinox; Mercedes-Benz E-Class; Subaru Legacy; Subaru Outback; Toyota 4Runner; Toyota Prius
• "BMW Z4" - 6" of write-up on pp. 3 starting with "BMW's redesigned roadster gets ..."
• "Buick LaCrosse" - 6" of write-up on pp. 3 starting with "The redesigned LaCross midsized four-door sedan ..."
• "Cadillac SRX" - 6" of write-up on pp. 3-4 starting with "The next-generation Cadillac SRX gets ..."
• "Chevrolet Equinox" - 6" of write-up on pp. 4 starting with "The redesigned Chevrolet Equinox is ..."
• "SMALL CARS" - 'Toyota Prius' even though the EPA rates it a family sized sedan
• "HATCHBACK" - 'Toyota Prius' even though the EPA rates it a family sized sedan
• "Fisker Karma" - pp. 73 ranks a listing even though it has not been tested.
• "Tesla Roadster" - pp. 156 ranks a listing even though it has not been tested.
• "Toyota Prius" - pp. 161 lists the 2009 and yet even the 2009 specifications are not used to identify "Recommended" that is now missing. The only 2010 Prius text, ". . . A 2010 redesign has just gone on sale. It features a 1.8-liter engine and is said to get better gas mileage. The driving position is supposed to have been improved."

In 200 pages of double-sided text including references to two untested models the Fisker and Tesla and four 'untested' cars described pp. 3-4, Consumer Reports doesn't even use the 2009 Prius characteristics in comparison to the other 2010 vehicles. They only have three sentences about the 2010 Prius, less than 1" of text. It isn't me nor Toyota as much as every other Consumer Reports reader who is being short-changed.

I already have a 2010 Prius so it is unlikely anything they write will 'hike me down to the dealer' to sell it. I already know from my own, accurate testing what this car does. For me, this issue has been a quality check of "Consumer Reports" and they failed it badly and with no skill. Sad to say, the Edmunds "mileage smack down" shows more quality than this unusually lame and contradictory issue of "Consumer Reports."

By another industry report, Toyota has a 13 day 2010 Prius inventory. It is the top selling car in Japan and in July joined the top 10 selling USA models. In short, Toyota has a supply problem, not a demand problem. So if "Consumer Reports" doesn't throw gasoline on the 2010 Prius flaming demand, I suppose this is 'no fault, no foul.' But it does mean "Consumer Reports" has by omission, regardless of their excuse, failed to share even a minimal list of attributes of the 2010 Prius in the issue titled, "NEW CAR PREVIEW 2010." It is an issue they gave four othere untested models over 12" of column write-up.

Now I don't know Rik Paul the Automotive Editor and now I don't really care. But this issue has ignored the 2010 Prius in a crude and ham-fisted way. He has succeeded in bringing disrepute to "Consumer Reports" as self-proclaimed, subscriber service by all but ignoring 'the elephant in the room,' the 2010 Prius, while making room for other 'untested models.'

Bob Wilson

 

I agree with fair, which is why this is so unfair:

• "COMING SOON Our early take on some new and upcoming models" - pp. 3-5, lists the BMW Z4, Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac SRX, and Chevrolet Equinox. It is missing the 2010 Prius.
• "WHY A VEHICLE IS NOT IN THE RATINGS The following models have been redesigned or extensively freshened since our last test. Most are scheduled to be included in future road-test reports in Consumer Reports. ... BMZ Z4, Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac SRX, Chevrolet Equinox ... 2010 Prius." - pp. 25

I agree with consistency and using the same standard, another aspect of fair, which is why this is an obvious contradiction:

• "Models by Category" - PP. 22, lists the Prius under "SMALL CARS" and "HATCHBACKS."
• The EPA rates the Prius as a "Family Sedan" since the 2004 model.

I also agree with accuracy, which is why combining parts of two Prius models is unfair to the reader:

• "Toyota Prius" - pp. 161, has a photo of the 2010, not identified as a 2010 and the paragraph has six sentences about the 2004-2009 and three somewhat describing the 2010. So lacking anything to report about the 2010, they 'filled space' with the 2009 description and dropped the "ROAD TEST SCORE" for the 2009. Use one or the other and it would be an accurate report but mixing the two, especially with their disclaimers about the 2010 improvements, is inaccurate ... a Franken-prius.
• "Fisker Karam" pp. 73 and "Tesla Roadster" pp. 157 - are both vehicles so new that Consumer reports has no data. Had Consumer Reports reported the 2010 Prius following the same style used for these two cars so there would be both a 2009 and 2010 Prius, both descriptions would be accurate. They are distinct vehicles so keep them apart.
• "COMING SOON" pp. 3-5 - had this section included the 2010 Prius and the 2004-2009 write up been left alone, there would have been no mixing of models. That would have been accurate and fit in the style of the magazine.

Everybody has a bad day and perfect is not going to happen every time. Every now and then Consumer Reports will make a mistake like they did when they made a math error on Prius payback several years ago. I also understand that dealing with model changes is not a trivial problem. But in this case, they handled the Prius model change badly:

1. Listed in an one section four models that they later wrote would not be covered in the vehicle review (does left hand know what right is doing?)
2. Put the Prius in two categories and neither matches the EPA classification
3. Mixed the NHW20 and ZVW30 in one report so the earlier data is lost and the ZVW30 data is ambiguous

Ultimately, Consumer Reports readers are the last editors. We evaluate their work and like a good editor, share our 'mark up' with the reporter or in this case, the editor. It doesn't mean the issue will be recalled but rather to offer instruction, corrective criticism so next year's "NEW CAR PREVIEW 2011" will handle the Chevy Volt and other cars fairly and consistently.

Bob Wilson

 

I was curious about the absence of 2010 data, only three weak sentences, when I came across the June 2009 issue, "The diesels are coming" pp. 60. Suddenly I'm getting this feeling that the Consumer Reports editors are planning to go diesel or give it try.

Right now, I'm wondering if Consumer Reports will wait until after the next car owner survey to report their 2010 review. Although they report having bought a 2010, I'm losing interest in their review. I've already filled out a J.D.Powers survey and as for the Consumer Reports review, it will at best be a day late and a dollar short.

Bob Wilson