Consumer Reports Top Loading Washers

[toploader55]

Well, it is from Yahoo and Consumer Reports... But there are some Kudos to Older Rapid Dry Fridgidaire Washers in the Comment Section. One person really knew their Fridgidaire. She comments about loading in Quadrants. Smart Cookie !!!

http://https//homes.yahoo.com/news/why-consumers-prefer-top-loading-agitator-washers-211500411.html

 

[washman]

Not a whole lot of positive comments on the HE washers there either. Imagine that!

 

[roto204]

Wow

Telling article.  I liked this part:

 

<span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 18px;">Like many of the commenters here, I bought a Speed Queen washer to replace it. It does a better job of cleaning my clothes, doesn't take 50 minutes to wash a load, doesn't make a fraction of the noise and has a reputation for lasting forever. #$%$ Whirlpool - AND Consumer Reports.</span>

 

I sense that CR is going to need to revise their reliability statistics; they don't seem to gather data far enough back to reflect the reliability issues that arise.  The other issue may be that there are insufficient subscribers submitting that data to reflect a true cross-section of the appliance purchasers at large.

 

[NYCWriter]

Nate ...

... BINGO!

I've long complained that Consumer Reports weighs PRICE along with other criteria in determining "value".

As we all know on this board, quite often, quality comes at a price. It is unfair and inaccurate to calculate quality, durability, and reliability through the lens of *price*.

 

[combo52]

Consumer Reports

NEVER rates by price, they rate by performance, and factor in past reliability of similar products from the same manufacturer, they do consider price when the product rates well and has a better price, for a Best Buy designation, but it NEVER affects ratings order.

Nate, isn't SQ TL still the most reliable brand in CRs reader survey?

 

[NYCWriter]

I should have been more precise ...

Consumer Reports doesn't rate "based" on price.

But price largely determines whether it's evaluated in the first place.

I've been told this directly by CR editors.

 

[combo52]

Consumer Reports

Hi Matt, could you define this price policy of CRs in regards of what they buy for testing, I look at many ratings in CRs and often some products cost three times what others cost.

And even if you talked to an editor at CRs it is most unlikely that he or she is the one that determines what is purchased for testing. Tell us more about this one person management of this well respected organization.

 

[NYCWriter]

John ...

... I'm not sure what you're asking.

 

[frigilux]

"But price largely determines whether it's evaluated in the first place."

If price plays a part in whether or not Consumer Reports evaluates an item, they're very good at hiding it. The complete list of their ratings for ranges, for instance, saw tested items sporting prices from around $750 to nearly $7,000. Similar examples abound.

Perhaps someone can step in and clarify any misinterpretation of your statement on my part.

 

[NYCWriter]

Well ...

"Perhaps someone can step in and clarify any misinterpretation of your statement on my part."

I'm only repeating what was told to me by several editors at CR.

Your issue is with them, not me.

 

[frigilux]

Your apology and admission of inaccuracy is accepted, Matt![this post was last edited: 11/18/2014-17:18]

 

[NYCWriter]

Um ...

"Your apology and admission of inaccuracy is accepted, Matt!"

I did neither.

 

[foraloysius]

parroting - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.wiktionary.org

 

[combo52]

Consumer Reports

Matt unless you are going to get statements from these CRs editors that include names, YOU are guilty of spreading bad information.

Anyone that actually knows much about how CRs operates would have know what you said was wrong, you really should be working for Fox News, maybe you are.

John L.

 

[washman]

No worries NYCWriter

I get your point.

I stopped CR years ago when their reviews shrunk to 4-5 paragraphs.

They've always had a left leaning agenda and generally abhor regulations like import quotas and tariffs but in the same breath, support CA propositions to increase cage sizes for chickens.

I have dozens of copies from the 50's all the way to the late 70's. That was when they really had comprehensive reviews and while I did not always agree with what they rated best, at least there was enough information given to make an informed decision.

Still, it's ok to question things even if it goes against the prescribed notion that government knows best and is almost always smarter than we are. You'll ruffle feathers here doing that but it won't be mine.

 

[frigilux]

Ben, this has absolutely nothing to with the government knowing what's best, or eco-Nazis, or CR's political leanings. Matt stated he was told by several CR editors that an item's price largely determined whether it was evaluated. I pointed out, with pricing documentation from CR's tests, the inaccuracy of that statement. John suggested Matt stop repeating that inaccuracy.

I see no problem with any of that.