11 Worst Cars...Jeep and Dodge Have 4 spots

litton · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:42 am

Really interesting how consumer reports rates cars.
Unlimited the worst, Liberty next to worst.

http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/ ... er-Reports

I'm not certain that their ratings are really credible as they completly discount the off-road performance.

kjfishman · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:08 am

litton wrote:

Really interesting how consumer reports rates cars.
Unlimited the worst, Liberty next to worst.

http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/ ... er-Reports

I'm not certain that their ratings are really credible as they completely discount the off-road performance.

Consumer reports is very biased. They rate don't rate fuel economy in a real world manor. They are a joke.

durangotang · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:36 am

haha I love reading these reviews. I wish I had been the one to come up with this setup:

1) attached arbitrary number to vehicle without telling why you did so.

2) Compare vehicles that are nothig alike on the same contexts..."We scored the new Abrams tank low because bulletproofing is not included in Consumer Reports' basic vehicle score, we were also unsure how to establish its crash rating as it drove through the wall (so we gave it 0 stars).... thus we voted the new Prius the car of the year. The Abrams took a close second followed by the Goodyear blimp and Aquaman's speedo."

3) This one is the best... rate the handling and give a score to a vehicle you haven't even tested... (Aveo5 in the article) :roll:

I really wish I had that job...

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:06 pm

Only 4 of 10?...well 10 of 10 would be too much to ask!

retmil46 · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:07 pm

My father recently received one of their mags, in which they rated both new and used cars.

Other than heavy duty pickups and the MB E320 Bluetec (all of which they rated poorly based on "quality" ratings), NOT ONE WORD on diesels, new, used, or otherwise.

Specifically when it came to used cars, rating them for fuel economy, nowhere did I find any mention of '06 and earlier VW TDI's, no mention of our CRD's, no mention of diesels period.

And of course, the Prius got rated the top car again for the umpteenth year in a row.

I also noticed some of their advertisements - send in a 5 grand contribution to CR and we'll set you up with a sweet fixed rate retirement annuity.

These guys are nothing but a bunch of scags.

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:07 pm

Only 4 of 10?...well 10 of 10 would be too much to ask!

The biggest problem is people read that stuff and act like it is proof positive.

Funny thing is they also don't award points for "reliability"...that is just plain stupid

kcfoxie · **Joined:** Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:27 am **Posts:** 113

Consumer Reports has given VW a poor rating pretty consistently since 2000. We've had little to no problems in our 98, 2002, 2005 and 2006 VWs. I really am nor surprised that we bought another one of their "worst picks" and will have nothing but good luck with it.

VW was rated poorly for bad power window regulators, while other cars (I won't name any names) were recalled for faulty fuel lines that would catch fire... and they were rated about the VWs. It's all about who gives the best kickback.

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

Their reliability ratings are based on responses from Consumers Union members (people who subscribe to Consumer Reports). They don't have any meaningful way to discount for bad dealer networks (VW's achilles heel, and frankly, MB's to), soccer mom's who don't understand preventive maintenance (IE, most Liberty buyers), die-hard Toyota and Honda fans who practice grade inflation (IE, the kind of people who started the Consumers Union back in the 70's when US cars sucked and the Japanese were building the best vehicles on the road).

Their fuel economy testing system is actually generally very accurate, and they measure actual consumption through the fuel line. The reason our Liberty CRD's scored so poorly is that their tests have no way of measuring diesel fuel return to the tank (which as a stupid mistake, but then again, how many small diesels do they get to test?)

Any way, I'm not a huge CR fan, but they have served to catch some pretty crappy behavior by automakers in the past (Isuzu flippage, anyone?)

Uffe · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 5:15 pm

Hell, if that's the level people pay money to receive, I'll make a magazine myself! I'll only rate cars based on color! And only rate the ones I can see at dealerships. This is going to be a hit!

Sir Sam · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 5:20 pm

kcfoxie wrote:

Consumer Reports has given VW a poor rating pretty consistently since 2000. We've had little to no problems in our 98, 2002, 2005 and 2006 VWs. I really am nor surprised that we bought another one of their "worst picks" and will have nothing but good luck with it.

VW was rated poorly for bad power window regulators, while other cars (I won't name any names) were recalled for faulty fuel lines that would catch fire... and they were rated about the VWs. It's all about who gives the best kickback.

In this case I would agree with them, my "experience of quality" with VW has been a polar opposite of yours, we always had nothing but problems.

I wash my hands of VW.

I think CR can be hit or miss, sometimes I think they are on the money, othertimes they miss the offramp.

Reflex · **Joined:** Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:48 pm **Posts:** 567

I have a lot of difficulty giving credence to CR simply because working in the tech industry I have seen thier reviews of computers, software and hardware and it has generally demonstrated a very fundamental misunderstanding of what makes a computer a good deal for a consumer. Its very clear when reading their technical articles that they do not understand the technology or what a consumer actually needs(as opposed to a consumers percieved needs). They also do not understand costs that go into making a product, and as a result assign higher values to things than their actual worth, back when I was assembling systems I could get a massive package of software to pre-install on a sold computer for around $25 total, but they typically rated systems that had this package(it was offered to all OEM's) a few hundred dollars extra in value due to the package being valued way higher than it was worth.

Seeing thier inexperience in tech it does not make me trust their judgement with cars, after all they are arguably more complicated than computers. For nearly a decade they praised Packard-Bell as the end all/be all of PC's while techs were cursing the name, who's to say the same situation isn't happening with Toyota?

gmctd · **Posted:** Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:46 pm

While pc's of either genus typically do not have, as a matter of consideration, a fuel return line to the tank, nor, for that matter, a fuel tank, most modern vehicles propelled by infernal combustion engines do have - gasoline-fueled engines had common rail systems long B4 they began showing up on Diesel-fueled engines - the rail fuel regulator typically has had a fuel return line for excess fuel, being of the bypass-type of regulation - measuring fuel return volume as an indicator of fuel consumption would depend on spec'ed flowrate volume of the fuel pump, as a regulator for a 20gph lift pump would return much less fuel than a regulator with a 120gph fuel pump.

'Nuther words, do CR just like you really do Playboy (I only read it for the articles!): pictures are worth a thousand words, eh..........

kcfoxie · **Joined:** Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:27 am **Posts:** 113

Sir Sam wrote:

In this case I would agree with them, my "experience of quality" with VW has been a polar opposite of yours, we always had nothing but problems.

I wash my hands of VW.

I think CR can be hit or miss, sometimes I think they are on the money, othertimes they miss the offramp.

Well, everyone's mileage is different. My mom has had nothing but trouble with her 2002 Focus, yet there are 4-5 folks at work with the same year/model and they love their cars... not a single problem.

It's all taken with a grain of salt. None of my cars ever saw the dealer (VW's biggest problem, as stated above), and I believe in turning my own wrenches or at least finding someone I trust to do it if I can't. I don't do brakes, timing belts for turbo cars, or clutches or suspensions... but i'll work on the turbo system itself, exhaust, etc... I know my comfort zones. I'm a different kind of owner, and really I'm more in love with the engine than the body. Thats why we have the Jeep... always kind of wanted a Jeep and really love a diesel engine. Perfect marriage.

Sir Sam · **Posted:** Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:18 pm

kcfoxie wrote:

Sir Sam wrote:

In this case I would agree with them, my "experience of quality" with VW has been a polar opposite of yours, we always had nothing but problems.

I wash my hands of VW.

I think CR can be hit or miss, sometimes I think they are on the money, othertimes they miss the offramp.

Well, everyone's mileage is different. My mom has had nothing but trouble with her 2002 Focus, yet there are 4-5 folks at work with the same year/model and they love their cars... not a single problem.

It's all taken with a grain of salt. None of my cars ever saw the dealer (VW's biggest problem, as stated above), and I believe in turning my own wrenches or at least finding someone I trust to do it if I can't. I don't do brakes, timing belts for turbo cars, or clutches or suspensions... but i'll work on the turbo system itself, exhaust, etc... I know my comfort zones. I'm a different kind of owner, and really I'm more in love with the engine than the body. Thats why we have the Jeep... always kind of wanted a Jeep and really love a diesel engine. Perfect marriage.

This is true, I have a hard time believing how many problems I see people post about on Jeeps compared to my "quality experience."

As do I, problem is VW makes way too many specific tools necessary for many jobs. Ignition switch for example, ends up just being easier to bypass it and have a push button start than to replace it. Throw in unneeded tools, complexity of repair jobs, and the large number of parts that wont interchange between models of the same year, and you get something that I cringe at the thought of.

sbohner · **Posted:** Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:48 pm

For decades, Consumer Reports was a good source of automobile comparison information. I would have a car or truck, go to various mechanics, and hear the same problems from them on given vehicles as I saw in consumer reports. Consumer reports was even we bold enough back then to point out how much better the Japanese cars were doing on reliability than the American cars. While I was uncomfortable with that truth, it was the truth.

However, over the past 15 years or so, they have not be a good measure of truth. They have acquired the label of "shill" since they report what the companies tell them. Let me be clear here -- to those who want to know, CR tells them what issues they will be evaluating. For example, CR looks at corrective actions as a key measure of reliability.

In owning both a Saturn and a Honda, I had experience with both dealer's service departments (and even multiple Honda and Saturn dealers' service departments). On the Saturn, I took the vehicle in for regular service and the dealer would ask me if I had any problems with the vehicle and even identify ones that were emergent. This indicated incentives to get problems worked out of the product.

During the same time frame (mid-late 1990s) Honda service took a different approach. I would take the Honda in for one of their expensive service intervals ($200-$600) and mention issues I had encountered. Invariably, the service staff would report that they looked and could not replicate the problem, and if pressed would dismiss it as not being problem. For example, my new Honda Accord EX was getting way below the reported 31 MPG on the highway (I got 23 MPG) and the engine was oscillating RPMs between 500-1500 RPM sitting idle at the light. The repeated response from multiple service managers from multiple dealers was "that's normal, they all do that." Yet nothing was reported by Consumer Reports. Why?

After some examination, a plausible story emerged. First, it appeared that Honda was attempting to control what was reported -- if there was no corrective action, there was no need to report it. Second, the service department is a separate profit/loss center from the sales - beholding to the company's interest in perceived reliability. Hence, even if the sales department pressures the service department to do a fix, they must clear it through the company (e.g., Honda America) -- something the main company does not want to do. Third, as long as the reliability issue will not cause physical injury, the more expedient strategy is to avoid repairs through delay. This way, the customer will tire of the interaction and resign themselves to be at the mercy of the dealer. After all, the product was rated well by Consumer Reports!

The moral of the story is that Consumer Reports has too-long rested on it's laurels of the 1980s. When they reported on the Liberty CRD a couple of years ago, they did a superficial evaluation that supported another effort where they were getting EPA to reexamine their measures for fuel milage. I'm confident that they did not drive the Liberty CRD like a diesel to get the assessment that they reported. Too much of it did not reflect my own experience with my CRD. The milage, the power for towing, and the like were opposite from my own (and many others from here on LOST). If on the other hand they had identified the TC, EGR, and fuel filtering delivery problems, I may have had a more positive message to send here.

MoLibertyCRD · **Posted:** Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:47 pm

I own two of the worst models according to CR, and am thinking about trading for another on their list. Looking at the list, quite a few of the vehicles I am interested in are on there. CR obviously doesn't understand/test 4x4 capability! :lol:

chrispitude · **Posted:** Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:25 am

While I love our CRD (as evidenced by the money and time I spend in fixing its flaws), I have to say that it's been one of the worst vehicle ownership experiences I've ever had. Too many things broke too quickly. We will not consider another Jeep product in the future.

- Chris

chadhargis · **Posted:** Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:42 am

I have to agree. The Liberty has too many flaws, but it's the only vehicle out there that meets my needs. If it weren't for the diesel engine, I wouldn't own one.

tjkj2002 · **Posted:** Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:02 pm

chadhargis wrote:

I have to agree. The Liberty has too many flaws, but it's the only vehicle out there that meets my needs. If it weren't for the diesel engine, I wouldn't own one.

You might want to rephrase-----The CRD has to many flaws. My gasser KJ has been great,I beat the living s#$t out of it offroad and have yet to break anything,other then the LBJ's(switched to MOOG's,no more problems) and a serp belt tensioner I have had zero problems,really good for 6 years.

JL Rockies · **Posted:** Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:39 pm

My CRD has been perfect. It even spent it's life as a rental before I bought it. It's an 06 with 54K miles on it....with lot's of MOAB miles!

11 Worst Cars...Jeep and Dodge Have 4 spots

Who is online