Just How Good Is 'Consumer Reports' Mag?
 

I used to read it years ago and it seemed pretty good back then - just wondering if it is still a pretty decent guide to the best products. Thinking of getting an annual subscription.

Ideas?

What does consumer reports say about it?

LOL

My step-FIL loves it, but I find that they don't review half of the models that I'm interested in. They tend to stick w/ the big name brands and most popular models (makes sense from a marketing prospective). As a result, I think they often lead the readers to believe they're picking the best brand/model on the market. In reality, they're just buying the best brand/model CR has reviewed.

I always felt they gave the best review to whoever slipped them the thickest envelope under the table.

On more than one occasion, I have seen how they are biased. They are very pro-Japanese car (In one review, the Toyota car wouldn't start, but somehow it ended up with a high reliability rating). I also saw how they created a testing methodology which made some products look really the opposite of reality.

For example: Bunn coffee makers keep a tank of water hot, so that when you pour the water in, you displace the hot water and it makes a pot of coffee immediately. The test proceedure had the technicians start the clock at the time the coffee maker was plugged in. So the Bunn needs a long time to heat it's initial tank. No one keeps a Bunn unplugged. They should have made a note of this in the test results, and also shown how long it takes a preheated Bunn to make a pot of coffee.

Create the test to sell the product? Hmmm...sounds like what we used to do at GE using the ol Six Sigma!

as per above, not perfect BUT they do use statistics unlike most places!
- that is why the Toyota episode did not affect their rating much

they have actually gotten better with their car reviews over the last few decades

I go to the library and read what they have to say before buying a non-specialty item

if you think about it, tools, cars, audiophile level electronics & etc. are all specialty items.

main problem I have is that by the time you read a review, the exact model they reviewed is gone and replacement may not be the same

2nd major issue is your goals have to align with theirs - e.g. you may not care about luggage space, but suspension feel is likely very imp. to those here...

My pop has a subscription and it's useful. I followed their lawn mower advice and couldnt be happier. Boring yeah, but their review was dead on.

Same goes for a mixer. The car stuff is too subjective for me. Outside of learning out major flaws or issues I dont care what the think of handling or performance.

I'm a second-hand car guy, so their reliability tracking is handy. It not only rates them, but also discusses the known failure "issues" so I know what to look for, and look at, when I shop.

James, their preference for Japanese vehicles over USA makes might have something to do with the observation that Japanese cars LAST TWICE AS LONG. Everyone knows you ditch an American car before mileage goes into a sixth digit. Hondas last a quarter-million miles whether you change the oil or not. Good poing on the Bunn thing, though, for sure.

Soup, it was 2 examples of their bias. I did find some of the information useful for many years. I don't subscribe anymore.

The magazine will not give you any advice an online forum couldn't provide. Plus you know the forum will give you at least 3 or 4 opinions that matter instead of 1 that could be biased.

They are biased, like everyone else. I've never seen any rag that could be considered unbiased.

BTW Toyota isn't at the top of their heap anymore. Also keep in mind a lot of their scoring isn't based just on their tests--they send out owners' surveys etc. and get a lot of their data that way.

I find them more useful for topics in which I have zero interest, like vacuum cleaners and refrigerators. To me, their computer reviews are pointless and their auto reviews are uninspired (though the reliability history, as Supe pointed out, is very useful).

I watched their review on the Nissan Titan for about 4 years. Nissan had taken steps to fix some of the problems with the earlier models, but C.R. just did a copy & paste year after year without taking a second look at the vehicle.

they probably lack sufficient data for a statistical analysis on the revisions
- that is another "problem" with using statistics

I find the comments in post #11 without any merit, as is the silly comment on bias below that.

I find CU useful for appliances and other stuff that is kind of hard to research through "enthusiast" forums. Like, I'm really going to go find the enthusiast forum for leaf blowers or microwaves or dishwashers or auto insurance policies, and spend hours browsing and asking about those boring things - no way, I'd rather consult CU. For stuff that I am more interested in - cars, computers, TVs - I find CU less useful, not that their information is wrong but their priorities are likely different than mine. The auto reliability data is very useful though, probably the best data that you can get short of the auto industry's internal data.

I dropped my subscription years ago when they did an article on orange juice.......What a waste of my time...........

When the 911s were very young, CR did a new car test indicating that the brakes were inadequate in some way. Don't remember the details, that was few years ago. I stopped reading then.

I've subscribed for a very long time and usually check the magazine out when I'm in the market to buy something. I don't always end up buying their top rated item, but I figure I don't have the resources or expertise to test like they do. Plus, they always mention things I haven't considered or didn't know about. That helps lots of times too at decision time.

Their wood stain review was dead on. They did a great job on conducting their experiments too. I'm glad that my parents have the magazine for the few times I need something and really can't find useful information online.

They never seem to review any particular model/item that I'm considering...

I just ask on here, my own little dysfunctional focus group.:D

I have used CR as a guide for years. And as a guide, not as the ultimate choice. My only issue is that by the time the ratings comes out, the item has already been replaced. You are then to decide if the replacement model for the one that is highly rated is as good? I do think like them on the most part and items I buy generally are rated well. Where else would you find out that a Dyson vacuum cleaner is not as good as one that cost 1/3 the price?

I've always felt they display a bias against products made in the US - sometimes warranted, but often not. If you value the opinions expressed at wine and cheese parties thrown by academics or the art community, or if you're in sync with the tastes expressed, for example, on NPR, then I think you'll be at home with Consumer Reports...

Totally different take than our enthusiast bias, but has reliability data that can't be matched elsewhere.

They finally seem to have noticed that proper handling can be a safety issue, as their latest reviews don't hate sports cars so much....

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1265214914.jpg

Any specific product examples to back this up?

They're strongly pro government regulation, consumer "activists" in the Ralph Nader mold:

IN BUSINESS - IN BUSINESS; Testing Toasters, Boots and S.U.V.'s - NYTimes.com

and then there's this from Newsbusters:

Consumer Reports Tosses Political Neutrality Away With Pro ObamaCare Ad | NewsBusters.org

Consumer Reports Tosses Political Neutrality Away With Pro ObamaCare Ad
By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive)
Mon, 10/05/2009 - 08:41 ET

So much for any claim of political neutrality on the part of Consumer Reports. They have now come out in support of ObamaCare which you can see on their website along with their TV ad. Here is the message from the president of Consumers Union, Jim Guest, publisher of Consumer Reports:

Health care has been a top priority of Consumers Union since we started back in 1936. In the pages of Consumer Reports and the advocacy work we do for consumers, we've long argued for better health care that's more affordable and reliable.

While working for better health care is not new for our organization, today we are doing something that we've never done before. For the first time ever, Consumers Union is weighing in with a TV ad that calls on lawmakers to find a solution for health reform.

You've also never engaged in partisan politics before. Say goodbye to your credibility, Consumer Reports:

You may wonder why we are injecting ourselves so publicly into a heated debate that has generated an enormous amount of concern and confusion. We believe that so much attention has been focused on the politics of health care that we're losing sight of the core problems. Health costs are skyrocketing, which affects all of us, and if you get seriously sick, having insurance is no guarantee that you'll get the care you need.

We are in the business of providing information and advice that helps consumers. We don't make campaign contributions. We don't endorse candidates. And we don't care who gets the credit for fixing the problems with health care—we just need them fixed. Doing nothing about health care is not a solution.

Too many Americans are just one pink slip away—or one major illness away—from losing their health coverage. That's why policymakers need to find a solution this year.

You might not endorse candidates but you sure are endorsing a highly unpopular Democrat health care bill that will be costly to the taxpayers. Here is an excellent analysis from Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion about the decision by Consumer reports to toss away both its political neutrality along with its credibility:

Consumer Reports has decided to weigh in on the health care debate in favor of the Democratic health care proposals, or what CR euphemistically calls "health care reform." Having decided to take sides, I think it is fair to hold CR to the standards it expects of the manufacturers and service providers reviewed monthly in its flagship magazine, and on its website.

Here is the mission statement of Consumers Union, the tax-exempt parent company of Consumer Reports (emphasis mine):

Consumers Union (CU) is an expert, independent, nonprofit organization whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves. The organization was founded in 1936 when advertising first flooded the mass media. Consumers lacked a reliable source of information they could depend on to help them distinguish hype from fact and good products from bad ones. Since then CU has filled that vacuum with a broad range of consumer information....

Is the CR position, as laid out on its health care reform website, consistent with its mission statement? Does it provide information which empowers consumers can make a fully informed decision? And does CR present the negative as well as positive aspects of the pending health care proposals, so that consumers can distinguish hype from fact?

Unfortunately, the answer to each of these questions is that CR has not lived up to its own standards. The presentation on the CR health reform website is completely one-sided and presents only the best case scenario as to health care reform proposals on the table. As discussed below, CR's presentation is partisan, and potentially misleading, in numerous material respects. CR's presentation is what one would expect from an advocacy group with a political axe to grind, not the heretofore non-partisan name in consumer protection.

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion has even more detailed analysis about the foolish nature of the decision by Consumer Reports to come out in support of ObamaCare. Read it as the requiem for the neutrality of Consumer Reports.

I was thinking more about their testing and rating of products. Which is what I thought this thread was about.

True, CU takes positions on issues pertaining to consumer protection, product safety, and now apparently healthcare reform. Do you think those taint their tests of dryers and vacumn cleaners?

Not necessarily; but given their political orientation I could easily imagine that they would tilt in favor of products manufactured by companies that they felt were more PC, "green", etc., even if it had nothing to do with the quality or reliability of the product. I'm not saying that all (or even most) of their reviews are biased, but if there is a political aspect to the product they're evaluating, I'm not sure I'd trust their objectivity.

What is the political aspect to washers, dryers, vacumn cleaners, handsets, TVs, leafblowers, tires, floor waxes, deck stains, etc etc? I think you are imagining things, alright.

Consumer activists like the ones who run CR can find a political aspect to most of the products that you mentioned (like I'm sure you could, and probably do).

How much CO2 went into the production of that tire?
How ecofriendly is that deck stain?
How much of their profits did the manufacturer donate to "progressive" causes?

Look, like I said most of their reviews may be OK, but they do have a political agenda as you acknowledged. The fact that they take public, macro political positions on things like health care, government regulation, etc. compromises their objectivity. That shouldn't be too difficult for you to imagine.