Yeah, well, look at it from their point of view... they're trying to recommend a car to the average consumer reports reader who's probably married and 40ish with a couple of kids... he wants something sporty but doesn't want to give up too much in terms of comfort or reliability.. if you were recommending a car to this guy the list might look pretty similar because you don't want him calling you up later and *****ing about how the car has a rough ride, or there's no cruise control, etc. The finer points of the car are completely lost on a guy like that. The focus SVT isn't fast but it's a damn good car for the money and definitely would crush an OZ around the track any day of the week for just a little more cash.

 

well who wants a evo for a family car?? not me i want it to look good and go fast! i got to take one for a spin the first day they were in the U.S. and all i could say was DAMN!!! i still want 1 and if any1 doesn't want their car because of this let me kno!!!!!!

 

I think CR's criterion prohibits having a car with a *beautiful* big wing in the top 5. Even the WRX ranks higher. Ouch!

 

Yeah, I wish my Evo had the low-end launch of a Celica...

 

We wanted a car that would be a hoot to drive on the road as well as the track. It sure is a nice benny to be able to pack a couple of suitcases, a cooler, and the dog for a weekend event.
To us the car is the best of all worlds, it definitely deserves a #1 or #2 ranking.

 

You would know

 

That's exactly what I was gonna ****in' scream. What others are they referring to. Do they mean other cars over $60g's? What ONE car in the Evo's class has sooooo much more low-end power that it warrants such a bold statement as "lacks the low-end response of the others" let alone two. All I can say is that unless a car is consistantly quicker than the Evo's 0-60 time every time, the phrase but lacks the low-end response of the others " is a load of horse ****! It's one thing if they bag the comfort or interior because that's not what it's about. But when they diss the whole ****ing point of the Evo and what makes it superior than most, that's horse ****!

 

It is unfortunate that Consumer Reports is as trusted as it is.

The publication is littered with bias, lacks factual basis, uses unscientific procedures, and bases its "Reliability" numbers on poorly conducted unscientific surveys.

They call cars noisy, yet provide no db measures at different speeds. Cars with huge recalls are deemed best picks (VW Passat). Surveys are sent to readers, which tend to have a limited demographic representation. The sample is small, the weighting of answers is obscure, and representation is unknown.

CR does not equeal Consumer Reports, but rather Crap Reports.

Forums such as this, even with the obvious propensity of misrepresentation by some members, are a better source of information.

 

Calm down. My take was that these old farts don't understand about the turbo lag.
They step on the gas and can't figure out why there is a second before the car spools and goes.
Heck, even my old Prelude outpulls my Evo from a standing start --- for a half second

 

Surveys are sent to readers, which tend to have a limited demographic representation. The sample is small, the weighting of answers is obscure, and representation is unknown.

Way back in the mid to late '90's, if I failed to submit a CR survey, CR seemingly lacked "sufficient data" to report on 1993 300zx--that's what I call heavily weighted.

 

You're right, they probably don't even know what spool means. They probably think it's the name of some Canadian *****. I like that comment though, "for half a second".

 

In their defense on this one specific item, the real world lacks scientific use/abuse. There's so much randomness that sometimes scientific study isn't the best way to find a failing point. My point being sometimes it's easier for an idiot to prove something is not fool proof than it is for a scientist to do the same.

Anyway, I agree they missed the point of the car and the list is SERIOUSLY retarded imo. Oh well. Those who know better drive better cars I suppose.

 

the fact that they put the evo in a listing which has a freakin' hyundai in it made me completely shun anything they said... oh well, atleast you won't have to worry about puss-drivers having the car; driving it for it's purpose. It still pains everytime seeing some old fart cruising in the slow lane at barely 65mph in a 911-turbo which he will never in his life take over 3500rpm

 

I read Consumer Reports if I am buying a microwave or a dishwasher, not if I'm buying a car.

 

They don't have enough "reliability data" to recommend the Evo, but they do for the STI??