Consumer Reports tests EVO
Evolved Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix, AZ
Originally posted by HobieKopek
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.
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.
I probably should clarify my point. One main failing of CR is the limited sample size, demographic, and and obscure questionnaire and weighting they use for their reliability studies.
Also, CR provides little in terms of numbers, where there are measurable data. They then make statements with few facts to back them up.
Wow... I wonder how they rate a Corvette, or a 100K 911
...They don't even HAVE cup holders!
The Evo is a 30K version of a 100K sports car with 2 more seats and a trunk. The people doing the test ride have no buisness being near a performance car...
I guess the 350z ranked low because it's cup holders are hard to reach...
...They don't even HAVE cup holders!
The Evo is a 30K version of a 100K sports car with 2 more seats and a trunk. The people doing the test ride have no buisness being near a performance car...
I guess the 350z ranked low because it's cup holders are hard to reach...
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 451
Likes: 14
From: North Jersey
For what its worth, the EVO was in the beginning of the "Excellent" range on their overall scale - the highest rating. The others were reasonably close. CR only recommends car where there is suficient reliabilty data, but how do they have enough on the US STI that is a brand-new car - anyhwere in the world? 
The WRX and STI are quite a bit different - especially with 2.5 L Turbo's detonation issues.
I am happy they at least compared a variety of sporty cars (focus svt was not in this comparison, but was in an earlier test).
The WRX and STI are quite a bit different - especially with 2.5 L Turbo's detonation issues.I am happy they at least compared a variety of sporty cars (focus svt was not in this comparison, but was in an earlier test).
I need a car with 5, not 4 cupholders. I want cruise control, with heated seats and a navigation system. I need a microwave for those days I wake up late for school. I need a fridge to store at least a 6 pack. A baby seat should be standard. Where's my grill and bike rails on the roof? On the other hand, I want the best handling on the lightest weight chassis you can engineer. Toyota, make me a Lotus Element!!
Originally posted by DynoFlash
Correction - Consumer Reports looks at the Evo from a ***** punk's point of view
The STI is best suited to crusing gay bars
Correction - Consumer Reports looks at the Evo from a ***** punk's point of view
The STI is best suited to crusing gay bars
