Car and Driver's $35k sedan Shootout
#41
lots and lots of fail
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by yianni64
I noticed that to. Does C&D usually get faster or slower results than the other guys?
I noticed that to. Does C&D usually get faster or slower results than the other guys?
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 02RSXTYPES
I think slower, but I wouldn't stake anything on it. R&T is the most consistent I've noticed, since they post weather conditions and everything.
I think slower, but I wouldn't stake anything on it. R&T is the most consistent I've noticed, since they post weather conditions and everything.
#43
Originally posted by yianni64
I think its kind of silly to see big variances on the same product, becuase that pretty much misinforms the consumer.
I think its kind of silly to see big variances on the same product, becuase that pretty much misinforms the consumer.
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DVPGSR
This is why I never choose one publication...each is biased in their own way, although some are better than others.
This is why I never choose one publication...each is biased in their own way, although some are better than others.
#45
Originally posted by yianni64
I can stand magazines, but crap like consumers reports and J.D. Powers pissses me off.
I can stand magazines, but crap like consumers reports and J.D. Powers pissses me off.
#46
lots and lots of fail
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I love how Buick brags of their "Initial Quality" awards by JD Powers...all that is is a sucker thing. Suckers get drawn in because of the initial quality but within a year it's falling apart and everything is worn. Nobody puts stock in initial quality, it is in fact very misleading (such as Saabs, as they have had very good initial quality for years)...but GM doesn't get it. Or rather their buyers don't.
CR sucks. Period. End of story.
Yianni, testing variations come from the vehicles, the temperatures, the humidity, and the elevation. It really isn't a bias thing.
CR sucks. Period. End of story.
Yianni, testing variations come from the vehicles, the temperatures, the humidity, and the elevation. It really isn't a bias thing.
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 02RSXTYPES
I love how Buick brags of their "Initial Quality" awards by JD Powers...all that is is a sucker thing. Suckers get drawn in because of the initial quality but within a year it's falling apart and everything is worn. Nobody puts stock in initial quality, it is in fact very misleading (such as Saabs, as they have had very good initial quality for years)...but GM doesn't get it. Or rather their buyers don't.
CR sucks. Period. End of story.
Yianni, testing variations come from the vehicles, the temperatures, the humidity, and the elevation. It really isn't a bias thing.
I love how Buick brags of their "Initial Quality" awards by JD Powers...all that is is a sucker thing. Suckers get drawn in because of the initial quality but within a year it's falling apart and everything is worn. Nobody puts stock in initial quality, it is in fact very misleading (such as Saabs, as they have had very good initial quality for years)...but GM doesn't get it. Or rather their buyers don't.
CR sucks. Period. End of story.
Yianni, testing variations come from the vehicles, the temperatures, the humidity, and the elevation. It really isn't a bias thing.
#48
lots and lots of fail
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by yianni64
I know that, I was just saying that its silly to see such bigvariances. I've seen 0-60 times vary by more than a second, that just crazy.
I know that, I was just saying that its silly to see such bigvariances. I've seen 0-60 times vary by more than a second, that just crazy.
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 02RSXTYPES
95 degrees F with a dewpoint of 80 degrees F at an elevation of 3,000 feet will yield more than a second off of 0-60 times tested at sea level with low temp and dewpoint. Unless it is FI.
95 degrees F with a dewpoint of 80 degrees F at an elevation of 3,000 feet will yield more than a second off of 0-60 times tested at sea level with low temp and dewpoint. Unless it is FI.
#50
lots and lots of fail
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by yianni64
Yup, so they shouldnt test at places like that.
Yup, so they shouldnt test at places like that.