How relevant is Consumers reports?

[luxflairguy]

My CR subscriptions is up soon and I can get a really good deal if I continue for 5 years. $1.55/month.
But how relevant and useful is CR anymore? Is it still a useful tool in selecting appliance and such. How many of you get CR or is it becoming a waste of $$$?
Thoughts please!
Greg

 

[washman]

It became a waste

of time, paper, and money for me around the early to mid 90's.

Being somewhat of a history buff, I collect certain things among them old magazines mainly for the old ads. I also have a large collection of old CR back issues.
Those are fun to read and really give one a good overview of the product being tested. The articles were much longer and more in depth than the cursory reviews they give today (ostensibly to satisfy the millennial generation short attention span).

CR likes to brag it is free from commercial bias as they accept no advertising, but they are hardly free from bias in general. For instance, they literally dogged the SQ TL machine because it uses more than a couple of quarts of water while praising to no end the HE machines due to their stinginess with water. Much has been debated here about that so I will not go into it.

I never did agree with their reviews on autos and much has been said about that on another thread as well.

I grab a copy at Tar-jay once in a while and browse through it but I have not paid for a copy in many years. Nor do I plan to do so anytime soon.

 

[moparguy]

I totally agree that CR goes into their research with every bit as much bias as any other magazine... that said, I consider their findings and recommendations as one data point, rather than the most important consideration as once may have been the case. I am no longer interested in paying for the overly brief reviews and conclusions that are designed more for headlines than for presenting actual detailed test results.

 

[frigilux]

One of the problems with the magazine is they often only show their "recommended" models instead of the entire list.  I get both the magazine and CR online, and if I were to have only one, it would be the online version, which still lists all models tested for many things...like appliances.

 

I don't have a problem with their testing methodology, but as with many here, I miss the more in-depth writing and reporting.  These days it's a paragraph or two and a chart. But as far as the reviews go, I generally purchase items near the top of their ratings and have had good luck.  As others have mentioned, use it as one tool among several when making big purchases.

 

CR also elicits a lot of criticism from our membership because of their constant testing/reporting/re-reporting of electronics: cell phones, TVs, computers, tablets, etc.  I'm sure those items sell a lot of copies, since people tend to replace their phones and computers more often than they do appliances and cars.

 

Frankly, while I prefer their online service to the magazine, they could really do so much more with it than they do.  Hopefully they will add features online as magazine sales dwindle.

[this post was last edited: 7/20/2014-19:50]

 

[danemodsandy]

Short Answer....

"How relevant is Consumers reports?"

Not quite as relevant as putting on white kid gloves and a little hat with a nose veil to do the grocery shopping.

In other words, it had its place once, but as they say in the South, them days is gone.

 

[d-jones]

Back in 1997 when I was shopping for a new truck I picked up one of their new car additions to see what they had to say. They ripped the Dodge Ram up one side and down the other, saying it was sure to have maintenance issues, the "cheap plasticky interior" was not likely to hold up well, and "its size and bulk were sure to take a toll on fuel economy." I bought the darn thing anyways. It's a three quarter ton diesel quad cab with a manual transmission. After 160,000 miles it still has the original clutch. I've replaced the brake pads, tires, an EGR valve, fuel filters, and one set of starter contacts. As you can see most of these things are routine maintenance items. The truck, and its interior, have held up far better than the magazine would have led one to expect.

Not long after that the folks at Ford came out with their Super Duty line of pickups that were far larger that my Dodge. I read what CR had to say about them and was not surprised to find no mention of their "size and bulk." That was the last time I picked up a copy. I have no use whatsoever for that bias laden rag of a magazine.

 

[wayupnorth]

I usually am shocked when they actually give a favoriable review to anything made in America. When they said SQ top loader was the most reliable recently, I almost fell out of my chair. David's last post about his Dodge was a perfect example. I bought a 91 Chevy Cavalier that they gave a horrible rating to. I put 140,000 miles on it with nothing other than normal maintainance. I dont read it, dont trust it.

 

[frigilux]

On their recommendation I bought a 1994 Geo Prizm (rebadged Toyota Corolla). They said it would be exceptionally reliable and very inexpensive to own.

It turned over 261,000 miles today on the way back from South Dakota. Original clutch, all original exhaust system. Replaced: Brake pads and spark plugs at 130,000; water pump and timing belt at 130,000 and again at 260,000; valve gasket; spark plugs at 130,000 and 260,000; some hydraulic thing that kept the clutch pedal up at 235,000. The car burns no oil, the AC has never been recharged. Gets about 40 mpg. on the highway. It is my only car and I drive it 75 mph on the highway. It has never once failed to start (except when the battery was dead and had to be replaced).

If you're gonna slam them when they're wrong, you gotta give them credit when they're right.

 

[alr2903]

Like others that have posted.  CU seemed to loose their way with white goods when the "electronic landscape" of cell phones and computers came along. For me it was too much on electronics and less on the appliances, home and yard care, television and automobiles.  You can not be all things to all people.  Young adults for the most part test electronics themselves these days. Their reviews in text form to their peers are old news by the time CU gets online or worse in the mail.

ALR

 

[kb0nes]

In my opinion for $1.55 a month you won't find any better buying resource then CR for the money.

To some degree I do share the thoughts that CR was far better in years past. It does seem that their reviews today aren't as in depth as they once were. I won't speak of bias because it would be conjecture for me to talk about something I'm not sure of.

I have long had problems with various reviews that they did. Most often in areas I was very fluent in like hifi electronics and automotive etc. While I would nit pick their methodology and tell folks they were wrong, I still felt that they were still a good resource overall.

For $1.55 a month I think I'd renew. Even today they beat the pants off of anonymous web reviews that tend to mostly be negative since disgruntled customers tend to be more likely to write reviews.

 

[launderess]

How relevant is Consumers reports?

About as relevant as whalebone corsets, but that is just me.

When you look at what Consumer Reports was like back in the day compared to now you want to sit down and weep. They cover far less and the information given in the magazines is rather skimpy. You are supposed to fork over more money IIRC to get "in depth" ratings online.

It is the same products over and over it seems, electronics, cell/smart phones, appliances and so forth. Then there seems to be the more "activist" bent CR has been taking of late on everything from healthcare to financial protection.

 

[tomturbomatic]

This was discusssed at length in thread 54251 begun on June 28, 2014. It can be found by typing "Consumer Reports" into the search window of the Super Forum. It is an advantage of the Search feature that the wheel does not have to be reinvented each time someone has a new question plus it saves you from having to spend time scrolling through all of the thread entries in a particular forum. Of course, that means that the people with questions have to do a bit of searching instead of just typing a question which might be a more solitary activity than starting a thread. There is a lot of relevant information in the archived portions of the various fora on this site. If you have not used the search feature in a forum, try it and see what comes up. In some cases the departed speak again and I mean that in the best of all possible ways. [this post was last edited: 7/21/2014-09:07]

 

[danemodsandy]

Tom:

I don't think it is reasonable to expect everyone with something on their mind to research before posting.

This is - or is supposed to be - a circle of friends, and if friends repeat themselves from time to time, well, friends don't worry about that overmuch.

There are things on AW that drive me slightly bonkers, too, but it's not my party, it's everyone's.

 

[alr2903]

Sandy you and Tom are both right. Most every topic is archived. However this is a club not a classroom.  Some people enjoy a fresh conversation, others do not.  I myself like to visit. 

Tom makes a very good point though, there is a lot of good information from members that unfortunately are deceased and can no longer post. Makes me happy they  still have old posts for all of us to learn from and enjoy.  ALR

 

[daveamkrayoguy]

Things like appliances are becoming too universalized & too similarly-built...

 

Without the challenge of differentiability that you get in<span class="tracklist_track_title"> phones,</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> consumer</span> electronics and things <span class="tracklist_track_title">like</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> in</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> hardware,</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> home safety</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> and</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> security,</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> insurance</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> and</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> healthcare,</span> <span class="tracklist_track_title">then</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> that</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> publication</span> <span class="tracklist_track_title">is</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> on</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> its</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> way</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> to</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> a</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> world</span> <span class="tracklist_track_title">of</span><span class="tracklist_track_title"><span class="tracklist_track_title"> eternal</span></span><span class="tracklist_track_title"> nonexistence...</span>

 

 

 

-- Dave

 

[tomturbomatic]

Every new thread causes an old thread to drop off the forum. Robert set up the search feature as a help. It is a shame not to use it. I posted to let people know it is there and to give them a hint about how it can be used and, sorry, but I do expect people in the information age when Google has become a verb to do a little bit of searching. We are not freaking baby birds who can't do anything more than sit with open mouths and cry for input. Having conversations is fine, but they can be had in extant fora.

 

[norgeway]

I collect vintage CR

The old ones ..50s-60s are great fun to read...sometimes on the money...sometimes wayyyy off, but fun and easily understandable...the new ones have all those silly symbols and very little in the way of test reports.

 

[foraloysius]

Here is a link to the other thread:

http://www.automaticwasher.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?54251

 

[danemodsandy]

I Guess....

....I'd better bow out of this one while there's still some enamel on my teeth.

 

[d-jones]

Lest anyone should think I based my previously stated opinion about CR's objectivity on one incident alone, I have another example of bias from the same period which effectively cemented my negative view of them. In 1997 when I placed the order for my new truck there had actually been three vehicles I was considering. The Dodge Neon, the Dodge Intrepid, and the three quarter ton Diesel Dodge Ram. The decision largely hinged on whether or not I could run Jet A fuel in the truck, and when it turned out that I could use it strait with no additives I went with the diesel. Had I not been able to run it my choice would have been between the compact fun to drive economy car or a full sized comfortable and roomy sedan. I was leaning heavily towards the compact Neon and read CR's opinions with interest. One statement jumped out at me immediately as bias laden swill. Regarding the Neon's mileage hey had written "fuel economy is unremarkable for a car in this class." I found that wording a bit odd, so I went ahead and looked up the fuel economy of a number of other small cars, and even though the Neon got better mileage than many of them, not one of those other cars had been saddled with the term "unremarkable."

They then went on to criticize the noisy cabin at highway speed, which is something I hadn't noticed when I had rented one to play around with. Again I did a little comparison. Another automotive magazine had done a more thorough examination of the Neon and other small cars, which included a decibel meter mounted in the cabin at head level by the drivers seat. After looking up the reading for the Neon(I can't for the life of me remember what it was) I compared it to other small cars and found that it compared rather well, being better than some and not as good as others. But I was surprised to see that it beat out the Acura Integra which had measured several decibels louder. Armed with this new info I went back to see what CR had to say about the Intergra. They had loved the car and had made no comment at all about noise in the cabin. So in spite of what others might believe(which they are free to do) I believe the folks at CR begin their examinations burdened with bias, and consequently seek to confirm their biases through the testing they do. This is not a scientific way to go about things and cannot help but lead to skewed results, which is why I no longer trust their views.

 

[washer111]

Search Feature

The Super-Searchilator that was present on this site forever is now only for upgraded members.

 

I have found the Google search to not always deliver appropriate results, or sometimes repeat results (unlike the Searchilator). That said, I think it is perfectly fine for non-upgraded members. The powerful Searchilator obviously takes effort to implement, and should therefore only be reserved for the upgraded members.

Sometimes, people may spend lots of time looking for information, but cannot find what they want to hear. Perhaps, the person found a discussion topic, but thought that information might have changed since the most recent posts, or they are looking for even more information themselves than they can find.

 

Often, I find myself looking everywhere for some information, not find it, but find an easy solution when posting on the forum.

 

Personally, I think it is slightly inappropriate to rush in with snarling teeth when referring to another recent topic. Perhaps the poster is unaware of the search feature, isn't sure how to use it, or didn't find what they wanted. I can't really comment, but I'm sure there is a perfectly valid reason why this thread was posted.

 

[alr2903]

Hey Tom no intent to set you off. I am sorry. But we will have to agree to disagree on this one." but I do expect people in the information age when Google has become a verb to do a little bit of searching. We are not freaking baby birds who can't do anything more than sit with open mouths and cry for input. Having conversations is fine, but they can be had in extant fora." sheesh.

"I do expect".  "Google is a verb". "We are not freaking baby birds...".  Really?  

 

 

[alr2903]

From "Forum rules".

Inflammatory posts or Personal Attacks: Public Forums: There will be no posts meant to offend or hurt any other member, in a manner which is offensive or inflammatory. This includes flaming or instigating arguments. Private Forum: Again, if the webmaster feels that a user is abusing the privilege of openness they will be warned and if they continue they will be banned. 

 

[alr2903]

This is an adjective:

Condescending:  showing or characterized by a patronizing or superior attitude toward others.

 

[tolivac]

As I said on another forum on this site bout CR-I let my subscription run out and WILL NOT renew it.Skimpy,biased reviews,Too much reviews on computers and cell phones,and not much on other things.And the online stuff drives me nuts-most of the time when reading a magazine I don't have a computer always handy-and you may have to pay extra to use the online material.Magazine publishes----STOP THIS,PLEASE!!!Print the material in the book---or not at all or print all of it online --NO MORE of this on both.On the biasing--remember several years ago when CU rated Maytag appliances and Hoover vacuums highly-Maytag and Hoover DID make large contributions to CU at the time.

 

[alr2903]

Tomturbomatic,  you offer so much to the club.  I always appreciate your input.  After being gone a couple of days and re- reading this post. I would like to apologize for the way I worded my post to you.  Some days, I don't know what the hell is wrong with me.  You  speak directly and accurately.  I hope you are a having a nice weekend.  Arthur

 

 

[NYCWriter]

I noticed this with vacuums, but am seeing it more often ...

... with everything else they rate: their arbitrary definition of "value".

NEVER have I seen a Kirby or an Aerus even evaluated by the magazine, but they are in my opinion two of the best vacuum cleaners on the planet today. But because the magazine has decided they're "too expensive", whatever superior mechanical virtues they have over all other cleaners on the market today are canceled out by their price tags.

 

[frigilux]

CONSUMER REPORTS / MARCH 2014 

<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Kirby Sentria</span> (Recommended model)

Price:  $1,350

Overall Score: 72 (bested only by the Kenmore Elite 31150 which received a 74)

Carpet:  Excellent

Bare Floors: Excellent

Tool Air Flow:  Excellent

Pet Hair:  Excellent

Emissions:  Excellent

Noise:  Fair

Handling:  Fair

Weight: 23 lbs.

 

CONSUMER REPORTS ONLINE / JULY 2014

<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Aerus Fresh Era</span>

Price:  $500

Overall Score:  44 (Kenmore Elite 31150 remains top-scorer at 74) 

Carpet:  Good

Bare Floors:  Very Good

Tool Air Flow:  Not applicable (does not have tools)

Pet Hair:  Excellent

Emissions:  Excellent

Noise:  Fair

Handling:  Very Good

Weight:  11 lbs.

 

You're welcome, Matt!

 

 

 

 

[NYCWriter]

WOW ...

Apparently they've turned over a new leaf (of sorts).

 

[frigilux]

...turned over a new leaf...

 

Not really, Matt.  I keep a pretty close eye on both the print and online versions and even I find it frustrating to track down every model they test throughout the year. It's understandable that others, having less contact with CR on a regular basis, can miss a review.