Thanks for posting those pics of Sgt. Carter's '60 Dodge, andre! The pic that had stuck in my head all those years is the pic in your link of the two-door sedan--just before the wrecking ball lands on it!
And lemko--Frank Sutton yelled about as much as Lee Ermey! LOL
My Dad was a Gunnery Sergeant in the USMC Reserves during the time of 'Gomer Pyle'. He had a flattop haircut like Sgt. Carter, and that was not lost on me in kidding him at the time. I always thought Frank Sutton sure looked the part. My Dad used to always say 'that's supposed to be Camp Pendleton, not Camp Henderson' and also 'it's not really like that', but then he'd laugh at something on the show. We watched it regularly.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Do you also agree--even if you think they're unimportant--that Asian brands have far and away led in recalls this year?
Of course - but I'm one of the ones who a) doesn't really see that as overly important by itself, as I've stated previously; and b) I actually see the focus on that as a deflection mechanism to the real issues of which vehicles are best, successful, and run by good companies. But that's just me.
Well, apparently, the people have spoken. Recalls don't belong in a thread about "The State of the U.S. Auto Industry". BTW, a few thousand '13 and '14 Toyota Tundras recalled today for potential engine failure.
I actually think the recalls topic belongs here, I just don't see it as such a big deal as some do. When the recalls point to significant issues, yes. When there are a large number but it's for a potential door handle being loose, no.
I don't think there have been too many recalls of the nature of 'loose door handle' posted here for quite awhile.
Incidentally, I was wrong on "Tundra"--the recall for potential engine damage is for Tacomas. Mea culpa.
When I see a Tacoma along the side of the road with a ruined engine, I'll make sure to take a picture and post it here twelve times. What a knee-slapper.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I'm pretty much in Tlong's boat, as it relates to recall viewpoint.
Fact is, the chances of anyone being injured in any modern vehicle defect subject to recall is really, really slim. I'm talking about Powerball winning odds here.
There's a reason we didn't see any massive national advertising campaigns by automakers using the Toyota UA incidents as a means to disenfranchise Toyota... They all knew that they were apt to be the next company with a product enduring such a fiasco.
Personally, when I'm buying a vehicle, I'm far more concerned with the vehicle's predicted service life/cost/frequency of repair than I am recalls. I don't ignore recalls completely, but that factor is way, way towards the bottom of my "concerns list", probably just below tire tread pattern/design.
Again, the chances of any particular person experiencing a life-threatening experience (on any recall-able item) in any modern, mass produced car sold in the USA today is incredibly minor.
Personally, when I'm buying a vehicle, I'm far more concerned with the vehicle's predicted service life/cost/frequency of repair than I am recalls. I don't ignore recalls completely, but that factor is way, way towards the bottom of my "concerns list", probably just below tire tread pattern/design.
Thumbed through it today. As mentioned here previously, they no longer can recommend the Cruze or Camaro as they say the reliability has "dropped to below average". They also no longer recommend the Accord V6 for the same reason, also mentioned here previously. What I don't recall seeing here is that the Kia Optima is "Not Recommended" (as opposed to not "Recommended") because of reliability questions. The Malibu has an average reliability rating, above Optima's and Accord V6's. I don't recall reading that here either. Just for full informational purposes.
As said previously, if I wanted one of those cars, I'd still buy one. Circlew said he has had zero issues with his Optima--much the same as my Cobalt. Apparently we are 'anecdotal'.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Cruze - Recommended! The Cruze is Chevrolet’s mainstream small sedan. It feels solid and substantial, handles nicely, and has a frm but controlled ride. The base 1.8-liter four-cylinder and the quieter, more refned up-level turbo- charged 1.4-liter each returned an unimpressive 26 mpg. An Eco trim is also available, but improves overall fuel economy by just one mpg. The well-fnished cabin feels spacious up front, even for tall drivers, but it’s cramped in the rear. Noise levels are fairly restrained for a car in this class. Crash-test results are impressive. Reliability has improved to average. A diesel engine rated at 46 mpg highway is new for 2014.
Camaro- Recommended! The Camaro has classic muscle car looks and sound. Our tested Camaro SS was very quick, thanks to its 6.2-liter V8 engine. The base 3.6-liter V6 delivers decent performance. Handling is very capable, but the car’s size and weight hurts agility. Braking perfor- mance on the SS is excellent, and the ride is taut and controlled but not punishing. The emphasis on exterior and interior styling impacts practicality, bringing severely hampered visibility, unclear controls, a small trunk, and a tiny rear seat. The convertible has an awkward manual top release. Reliability has been average. High- performance ZL1 and Z/28 versions are new.
Malibu - New(not recommended) the Malibu is a comfortable and very quiet mid-sized sedan with a cushy ride and a well-fnished interior. It offers three four-cylinder drivetrains, each paired with a six-speed automatic. The Eco version uses a mild-hybrid electric assist system that smoothly shuts off and seamlessly restarts the engine at idle. We got 29 mpg overall in our tests. The 2.5-liter engine returned 26 mpg. The quicker 2.0-liter turbo four-cylinder gets 24 mpg. It is a comfortable and very quiet midsized sedan, with a cushy ride. Handling is sound, but gets soggy at its limits. Controls are simple and straightforward, but the backseat is cramped. Thankfully, trunk room is suffcient even in the hybrid.
Optima - Recommended! the Optima is Kia’s version of the Hyundai Sonata, and falls short of its corporate cousin in ride comfort, braking, and fuel economy. It handles well but the ride is borderline stiff and road noise is noticeable. The standard 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine per- forms well. Top-level trims get a turbo four-cylinder that’s economi- cal and powerful but not as refned as competitors’ V6 engines. An unrefined hybrid, which received changes in 2013 to increase fuel efficiency, is also available. The front seats are comfortable, but the rear seat is low. The styling detracts from rear visibility and access. Reliability has been average or above. A freshening is due this fall.
You are not looking at their latest issue, plain and simple. Camaro, Cruze, and your Optima are "Not Recommended" (not just not "recommended"--there's a difference). Malibu reliability is better than Optima and Accord V6, per CR anyway.
On newsstands now!
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
The Malibu had insufficient data to be recommended in April but now does. Optima 2.0 turbo and Chevy Cruze and Camaro V8 show declining reliability and so are on their "Not recommended" list. The 2013 Accord V6 has enough problems that this year it is also not recommended. Also both versions of the new Nissan Altima. Time will tell if these cars improve again. As they say in their explanation, Many of the cars on the list are new versions so it often takes more than 1 year to see if a trend continues or reverses.
I was thinking that both versions of the Optima were on the "Not Recommended" list, but apparently not--again, I browsed for free on the rack. I do remember them saying that the average mileage of their 2013 models sampled was only 3,000, so not sure how much weight I'd put into that.
Still, some of that news is not exactly the conventional wisdom.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I trust my own experience over other folks'. I know I maintain the car religiously. Just sayin'. But for all the talk a year ago about how the new Malibu was not "Recommended", my, how things can change in a year in the same magazine.
A smallish thing perhaps, but I was prepared to buy a new battery for my Cobalt (built April 2008 and sits out all the time), just in case. Guy at the parts store tested it and said, "Geez, you still have over 500 amps of cold-cranking power. I wouldn't replace it." So, I didn't.
I do think keeping the battery in the trunk is a good engineering idea. Originally done for weight distribution, but keeps it away from engine heat and all the gunk and crap that gets under the hood.
Most here would doubt it probably, but I bought my car not long after the XFE package first came out, and my dealer had to go to a dealer five hours away to get what I wanted in one, and that dealer only had it in stock for eight days.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
No, you missed the point about the Malibu. It wasn't "not recommended" before. They didn't have enough data one way or the other to say. Now they do. I am surprised about the Cruze though because it has been out awhile now. It will be interesting to see how it fares next April after their next major survey.
> a reliability survey is only as good as the survey itself purports to be.
A survey can purport (represent) itself to be as valid as they want, but the true validity comes from a truly random sample and a large enough sample to give a range of accuracy, i.e., 58% will vote for John Doe with a +/- range of 3% because they used a sample of 850 random telephone numbers.
So CR purports they have a valid survey, but they don't give the number of owners sampled who own 2013 Malibus, e.g.. They also don't disclose that they did anything other than a convenience survey instead of random surveying techniques. Also were all those Optima owners mentioned in an earlier post 75 years old -80 years old? Or were they 29 year-olds who drive the car like heck and truly test it for flaws.
So the claim that >The following is, IMO, flawed reasoning. >1. CR says 2003 Mini Coopers are awful >2.Shiftright's 2003 Mini Cooper has been reliable
may not actually indicate flawed reasoning, just variation in sample.
P.S., based on MrShift's comments about how difficult some things are to get to, the Mini folks don't need to worry about my choosing one of their vehicles, no matter how neat they are to look at.
One should not believe any "survey" until you know the way they did it. There are so many ways to fudge a survey any way you want. You can dismiss selected data, you can word the questions a certain way, your sample size could be too small or not random enough.
You see this a lot in surveys on health issues especially.
You even have to make sure the source of the survey is impartial. The very NAME "Consumer Reports" makes you wonder of course---will they actually give kudos to an automaker they have delightfully pounded on for years and years?
One hopes so.
Bottom line--I wouldn't base any buying decision from say one neighbor's report.
suydam, I understand completely. An anti-GM poster last spring posted that the Malibu was "Not Recommended", which was not true. It was not "recommended" as it was too new for reliability data. There was much gloating at the time, initially, about that it wasn't "Recommended", although the post was wrong. Now, CR says the Optima is less reliable than the Malibu, as is the Honda V6. What I'm not sure they're saying is, is this only for 2013 models, or is this a new trend of more than one model year? As mentioned before, the average 2013 car supposedly only had 3,000 miles in their survey.
As I've said before, I've seen so many ups and downs from one model year to the next of the same, basically unchanged car, and things like the stereo in a 4-cylinder model is more troublesome than the V6, etc., I won't worry about using them. I am curious as to the metholodology in this latest survey. We had discussed not too long ago that in the last issue I looked at, they had V6 and V8 Camaros lumped together in their reliability chart, with no way to differentiate. Apparently now, only the V8 Camaro is below average, so I'll say that seems to be good that they are differentiating now.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
With all the whining and moaning about Malibu's rear seat legroom 2013, the 36,8 in the Malibu sported was more than the Optima's 34.7 in according Edmund's specifications here.
And Malibu even increased rear legroom for 2014, but Edmund's doesn't have the 2014 data in the list that I can access. There the difference will be even greater.
"Even when I've had a good experience with a troublesome brand (VW), I can acknowledge that that brand is generally less reliable. But that's just me."
I owned a 1975 Pontiac Astre Safari (Pontiac's version of the Vega wagon). I put 75K miles on the car, and it wasn't in the shop once for anything other than oil/filter changes.
I doubt most Vega/Astre owners would have experienced the same level of trouble-free driving I did. If I lived in a vacuum, I would have recommended the car.
Conversely, if you felt your specific car was a POS, but CR says it shouldn't have been, would you buy another? I think if we're honest with ourselves here, most people would not.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Believing your own experience over other people's makes sense; believing anecdotal information over verified statistics moves into the realm of being faith-based rather than entirely rational.
On some levels, that's just fine. In spending $30,000, maybe better to look at the statistics.
"Believing your own experience over other people's makes sense; believing anecdotal information over verified statistics moves into the realm of being faith-based rather than entirely rational.
On some levels, that's just fine. In spending $30,000, maybe better to look at the statistics. "
Absolutely.
Taking you coworker's word that Fred's Bar and Grill serves excellent food makes sense if the cost of a meal is $10.
Taking only your coworker's word that the $250 meal at the Food Palace downtown is an excellent dining experience might not be the wisest decision. Maybe reading a few reviews might be in order.
I don't think the auto industry provides warranty figures for each model outside of the company. So I think all of these auto dependability surveys from CR to JD Powers are based on sample survey data. CR has subscribers fill in a form mailed out each year. JDP follows up on sales data I believe. More than likely the people most likely to answer either love or hate their purchase, while the majority of the bell curve likely have a lower response rate. You can still use this stuff to look for trends though, and early warnings if you already own the vehicle. CR red and black dots are from the survey input, but their overall scores are a composition of survey input and their own tests and opinions. I think CR breaks out the repair problem data better and doesn't get into some of the "intrinsic" ownership opinions present in some of the other surveys. Then you've got the question of whether some of the others like JDP or Strategic Vision are making their money by selling the data to manufacturer's and dealers (Might clean it up a bit if that is the case?). So nothing is perfect, but I don't think it means you can't utilize it accordingly and gain some insight.
I guess if CR (and the others, I suppose) would just say that there might be some sample error, I'd be more satisfied. CR treats their survey like the gospel. And of course, you must subscribe to participate. I simply cannot believe that for a car where the engine and trans and virtually nothing else of import changed in five years, the wild swings in reliability from one model year to the other. But that's me.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Then you've got the question of whether some of the others like JDP or Strategic Vision are making their money by selling the data to manufacturer's and dealers (Might clean it up a bit if that is the case?).
That's exactly how they make their money - by selling their data to anyone that's interested. I don't believe that they "clean it up." I think it's more of a case that they slice and dice it until the client can find something useful to use in their marketing.
I simply cannot believe that for a car where the engine and trans and virtually nothing else of import changed in five years, the wild swings in reliability from one model year to the other.
Don't forget (and we've discussed this before) that the CR ratings are compared to the averages for a vehicle class. So a vehicle could be aging at a worse or better rate than its competitors, and its ratings would vary. As an example, if a 2007 vehicle class was less reliable than vehicle X, then X gets a favorable rating. If that same vehicle class in 2010 is much more reliable (across all vehicles in the class), then the 2010 version of that vehicle could be average, because the competitors are much better now. So our candidate vehicle's ratings might change from 2007 to 2010, even though the vehicle might be identical. The change in rating would be due to the movement in the entire class.
>>>>>A smallish thing perhaps, but I was prepared to buy a new battery for my Cobalt (built April 2008 and sits out all the time), just in case. Guy at the parts store tested it and said, "Geez, you still have over 500 amps of cold-cranking power. I wouldn't replace it." So, I didn't. >>>>>
Our vehicles are garage kept and we are in northern Illinois which can have very cold and brutal winters. I have been replacing batteries every 3-4 years on each vehicle. A decent battery can be bought for a little over a hundred dollars. This is a very small cost to incur to have peace of mind, especially if one lives in a cold weather part of the country.
>>>>>>CR has subscribers fill in a form mailed out each year. JDP follows up on sales data I believe. More than likely the people most likely to answer either love or hate their purchase, while the majority of the bell curve likely have a lower response rate. >>>>>>
How "likely" is your reasoning flawed that response rates are higher for lovers and haters of purchases?
Right, but they say "Models to avoid" and "Good Bets", and their recommendations are rather flat in that regard. A 2007 dullsmobile might not be any worse than a 2006 or 2008, but their results can show that. I find that a little laughable. Sure, this 'might' have happened, but big pic--not very likely. I won't get into it all again here though.
When someone is looking for a recommendation for a used car to buy, do folks look only for a certain model year? Then, their recommendations may make a little more sense. I'm thinking most people don't shop like that, but for a range of model years.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Well, there's 'range' and then there's 'generation'. I'd say avoiding a particular year of a new generation due to a bad rep is fairly common practice for any prudent shopper. Not that I'm defending CR mind you...I rate them mildly better than your average grocery line tabloid selection.
..ok, ok..maybe that was a little harsh...but let's just say I don't hang off their every word. At best I may catch just a wind current draft of their word..
Just saw how my company sold one of it's helicopter engine businesses to a French company for $469 million this year. Hmmmmm $469 million to buy a helicopter engine company or to design a website? I think we spent $469 million so far on a broken website as the supposed smartest country in the world. And to think the guy running this sham asked the CEO of GM to step down a few years ago for poor performance.
Well think of the Pres/CEO analogy as the CEO of GM trying to build cars with the union puncturing all the tires, threatening suppliers, and printing ads telling everyone how bad the new cars will be.
Actually, in the real world these things used to happen. In the UK, sabotage was not uncommon in the 60s, and so, too at Harley Davidson in the early 80s, and of course the infamous GM Lordstown plant.
"I'd be grumpy about replacing a battery in three years. I have better stuff on which to spend over $100. "
I'll gladly spend $100 every 3-4 years to keep from being stranded or inconvenienced.
I've learned my lesson. My Suburban was almost exactly 4 years old when we had it loaded up for summer vacation. It was 5 am, had the kids sleeping in the back seat, boat was hooked up, got in and click. !@##, you gotta be kidding me. Thankfully I was able to get a battery from a Walmart Supercenter at 5:30am (still cost me over an hour due to what a PITA it was to get the battery out in the dark). I was one start away from possibly being stranded at a rest area. What away to start a vacation.
Unfortunately I didn't learn. When my Expedition was about exactly 4 years old, we were down at the lake when the battery died w/o warning. I couldn't even get it to start with the 50amp boost from my battery charger. Thankfully my wife's car was down there too, so I was able to run to Napa which was 20 miles away, basically lost most of the morning..
Never again, if I do keep the Ram more than 4 years, it's getting a battery before 4 years regardless of how it tests. I have a battery load tester, I've never been able to predict impending battery failure, it either tests fine or is dead. And that's across a variety of vehicles I have with batteries. Golf cart, waverunner, boat, camper, lawn tractor and of course vehicles. Seems like I buy batteries yearly for something.
To add to my data sample, now that I think about it, just about every vehicle we've owned has needed a battery replacement by 4 years. That would be our '94 Probe, '96 Mercury Villager, '00 Suburban, '01 Pathfinder, and my 07 Expedition. None had a battery last more than 4 years and they were all replaced when the vehicle wouldn't start due to a battery failure.
So no, a battery isn't an area I'm looking to save money.
To add to my data sample, now that I think about it, just about every vehicle we've owned has needed a battery replacement by 4 years. That would be our '94 Probe, '96 Mercury Villager, '00 Suburban, '01 Pathfinder, and my 07 Expedition. None had a battery last more than 4 years and they were all replaced when the vehicle wouldn't start due to a battery failure.
Your battery experience mirrors mine. I don't think I've ever gone over 4 years. When I was young and poor I used ty try and recharge them and nurse them. Invariably they'd fail completely within a month or so if they were exhibiting signs of weakness. Nowadays I don't have time for that - the first sign of weakness and it's off to buy a new one. I don't really want to deal with an unrealiable vehicle.
Since I've been buying batteries at Costco, they're also usually prorated and end up costing very little, as they always return some significant credit. They never make it to the warrantied lifetime.
Cars that have a radio, HVAC and lights as the only power options should drain the battery every 10 years or so. No options, no drain.:)
Some here no nothing about the real-life experience of cars that are not bare bones economy boxes. 4 years is about average. No big deal or annoyance. You get what you pay for.
My '94 Suburban needed battery changes every 2 years. The system checked OK until the 4th battery replacement indicated a failed alternator. Traded that sled in for the '03 Lincoln LS.
Another failure-prone GM from my past. (alternator, blown head gasket, water pump as well as dash board rattles it's entire life.).
Only here is a smallish positive in a domestic looked at disdainfully. Insert SNL 'Debbie Downer' music here.
How was that Lincoln LS? I haven't heard much good about them, although I always liked the looks of them.
Why would someone buy a battery when any auto parts store will test your battery for free? And someone mentioned "...at the first sign of weakness." I haven't experienced that sensation of slow cranking or dim lights in decades. I have had batteries die with no warning, although not in many, many years.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Man, you have bad luck. Bad '94 and '03 GM's, and now, a decade later, a car that's "Not Recommended".
Seriously though, you said you've had zero issues with your Optima. Good for you. Hard to say it's anecdotal when it's your own personal experience, right? On that we'd agree I think.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
"Why would someone buy a battery when any auto parts store will test your battery for free? "
Why would someone bother testing a 4 year old battery that died for no obvious reason (nothing left on etc)? If I have to remove it from the vehicle and haul it into an auto parts store, I'm going home with a new battery.
Yeah I know. I have a load tester. I have a load tester and many places test batteries during routine maintenance. I've never had a test say I had a bad battery or save me from experiencing a battery failure. Batteries just seam to randomly fail. Deep cycles are different, they noticably lose capacity and require longer charge cycles.
Cars that have a radio, HVAC and lights as the only power options should drain the battery every 10 years or so. No options, no drain.
Not so sure that's the reason. I believe the largest electrical consumer in most cars by far is the headlights. What other electrical accessories would come close to those?
Comments
And lemko--Frank Sutton yelled about as much as Lee Ermey! LOL
My Dad was a Gunnery Sergeant in the USMC Reserves during the time of 'Gomer Pyle'. He had a flattop haircut like Sgt. Carter, and that was not lost on me in kidding him at the time. I always thought Frank Sutton sure looked the part. My Dad used to always say 'that's supposed to be Camp Pendleton, not Camp Henderson' and also 'it's not really like that', but then he'd laugh at something on the show. We watched it regularly.
Of course - but I'm one of the ones who a) doesn't really see that as overly important by itself, as I've stated previously; and b) I actually see the focus on that as a deflection mechanism to the real issues of which vehicles are best, successful, and run by good companies. But that's just me.
I actually think the recalls topic belongs here, I just don't see it as such a big deal as some do. When the recalls point to significant issues, yes. When there are a large number but it's for a potential door handle being loose, no.
Incidentally, I was wrong on "Tundra"--the recall for potential engine damage is for Tacomas. Mea culpa.
When I see a Tacoma along the side of the road with a ruined engine, I'll make sure to take a picture and post it here twelve times. What a knee-slapper.
Fact is, the chances of anyone being injured in any modern vehicle defect subject to recall is really, really slim. I'm talking about Powerball winning odds here.
There's a reason we didn't see any massive national advertising campaigns by automakers using the Toyota UA incidents as a means to disenfranchise Toyota... They all knew that they were apt to be the next company with a product enduring such a fiasco.
Personally, when I'm buying a vehicle, I'm far more concerned with the vehicle's predicted service life/cost/frequency of repair than I am recalls. I don't ignore recalls completely, but that factor is way, way towards the bottom of my "concerns list", probably just below tire tread pattern/design.
Again, the chances of any particular person experiencing a life-threatening experience (on any recall-able item) in any modern, mass produced car sold in the USA today is incredibly minor.
This.
As said previously, if I wanted one of those cars, I'd still buy one. Circlew said he has had zero issues with his Optima--much the same as my Cobalt. Apparently we are 'anecdotal'.
Cruze - Recommended!
The Cruze is Chevrolet’s mainstream small sedan. It feels solid and
substantial, handles nicely, and has a frm but controlled ride. The
base 1.8-liter four-cylinder and the quieter, more refned up-level turbo-
charged 1.4-liter each returned an unimpressive 26 mpg. An Eco trim
is also available, but improves overall fuel economy by just one mpg.
The well-fnished cabin feels spacious up front, even for tall drivers,
but it’s cramped in the rear. Noise levels are fairly restrained for a car
in this class. Crash-test results are impressive. Reliability has improved
to average. A diesel engine rated at 46 mpg highway is new for 2014.
Camaro- Recommended!
The Camaro has classic muscle car looks and sound. Our tested
Camaro SS was very quick, thanks to its 6.2-liter V8 engine.
The base 3.6-liter V6 delivers decent performance. Handling is very
capable, but the car’s size and weight hurts agility. Braking perfor-
mance on the SS is excellent, and the ride is taut and controlled
but not punishing. The emphasis on exterior and interior styling
impacts practicality, bringing severely hampered visibility, unclear
controls, a small trunk, and a tiny rear seat. The convertible has an
awkward manual top release. Reliability has been average. High-
performance ZL1 and Z/28 versions are new.
Malibu - New(not recommended)
the Malibu is a comfortable and very quiet mid-sized sedan with a
cushy ride and a well-fnished interior. It offers three four-cylinder
drivetrains, each paired with a six-speed automatic. The Eco version
uses a mild-hybrid electric assist system that smoothly shuts off and
seamlessly restarts the engine at idle. We got 29 mpg overall in our
tests. The 2.5-liter engine returned 26 mpg. The quicker 2.0-liter turbo
four-cylinder gets 24 mpg. It is a comfortable and very quiet midsized
sedan, with a cushy ride. Handling is sound, but gets soggy at its
limits. Controls are simple and straightforward, but the backseat is
cramped. Thankfully, trunk room is suffcient even in the hybrid.
Optima - Recommended!
the Optima is Kia’s version of the Hyundai Sonata, and falls
short of its corporate cousin in ride comfort, braking, and fuel
economy. It handles well but the ride is borderline stiff and road
noise is noticeable. The standard 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine per-
forms well. Top-level trims get a turbo four-cylinder that’s economi-
cal and powerful but not as refned as competitors’ V6 engines. An
unrefined hybrid, which received changes in 2013 to increase fuel
efficiency, is also available. The front seats are comfortable, but the
rear seat is low. The styling detracts from rear visibility and access.
Reliability has been average or above. A freshening is due this fall.
So, reliability in the Optima is above average.
Test Drive: 2014 Chevrolet Malibu quickly updated
On newsstands now!
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
Still, some of that news is not exactly the conventional wisdom.
The following is, IMO, flawed reasoning.
1. CR says 2003 Mini Coopers are awful
2.Shiftright's 2003 Mini Cooper has been reliable
3. Therefore, CR's conclusion is wrong
Or is it............
Shiftright was lucky?
ON THE OTHER HAND, a reliability survey is only as good as the survey itself purports to be.
A smallish thing perhaps, but I was prepared to buy a new battery for my Cobalt (built April 2008 and sits out all the time), just in case. Guy at the parts store tested it and said, "Geez, you still have over 500 amps of cold-cranking power. I wouldn't replace it." So, I didn't.
I do think keeping the battery in the trunk is a good engineering idea. Originally done for weight distribution, but keeps it away from engine heat and all the gunk and crap that gets under the hood.
Most here would doubt it probably, but I bought my car not long after the XFE package first came out, and my dealer had to go to a dealer five hours away to get what I wanted in one, and that dealer only had it in stock for eight days.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
A survey can purport (represent) itself to be as valid as they want, but the true validity comes from a truly random sample and a large enough sample to give a range of accuracy, i.e., 58% will vote for John Doe with a +/- range of 3% because they used a sample of 850 random telephone numbers.
So CR purports they have a valid survey, but they don't give the number of owners sampled who own 2013 Malibus, e.g.. They also don't disclose that they did anything other than a convenience survey instead of random surveying techniques. Also were all those Optima owners mentioned in an earlier post 75 years old -80 years old? Or were they 29 year-olds who drive the car like heck and truly test it for flaws.
So the claim that
>The following is, IMO, flawed reasoning.
>1. CR says 2003 Mini Coopers are awful
>2.Shiftright's 2003 Mini Cooper has been reliable
may not actually indicate flawed reasoning, just variation in sample.
P.S., based on MrShift's comments about how difficult some things are to get to, the Mini folks don't need to worry about my choosing one of their vehicles, no matter how neat they are to look at.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
One should not believe any "survey" until you know the way they did it. There are so many ways to fudge a survey any way you want. You can dismiss selected data, you can word the questions a certain way, your sample size could be too small or not random enough.
You see this a lot in surveys on health issues especially.
You even have to make sure the source of the survey is impartial. The very NAME "Consumer Reports" makes you wonder of course---will they actually give kudos to an automaker they have delightfully pounded on for years and years?
One hopes so.
Bottom line--I wouldn't base any buying decision from say one neighbor's report.
As I've said before, I've seen so many ups and downs from one model year to the next of the same, basically unchanged car, and things like the stereo in a 4-cylinder model is more troublesome than the V6, etc., I won't worry about using them.
And Malibu even increased rear legroom for 2014, but Edmund's doesn't have the 2014 data in the list that I can access. There the difference will be even greater.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Even when I've had a good experience with a troublesome brand (VW), I can acknowledge that that brand is generally less reliable. But that's just me.
I owned a 1975 Pontiac Astre Safari (Pontiac's version of the Vega wagon). I put 75K miles on the car, and it wasn't in the shop once for anything other than oil/filter changes.
I doubt most Vega/Astre owners would have experienced the same level of trouble-free driving I did. If I lived in a vacuum, I would have recommended the car.
On some levels, that's just fine. In spending $30,000, maybe better to look at the statistics.
On some levels, that's just fine. In spending $30,000, maybe better to look at the statistics. "
Absolutely.
Taking you coworker's word that Fred's Bar and Grill serves excellent food makes sense if the cost of a meal is $10.
Taking only your coworker's word that the $250 meal at the Food Palace downtown is an excellent dining experience might not be the wisest decision. Maybe reading a few reviews might be in order.
That's exactly how they make their money - by selling their data to anyone that's interested. I don't believe that they "clean it up." I think it's more of a case that they slice and dice it until the client can find something useful to use in their marketing.
Don't forget (and we've discussed this before) that the CR ratings are compared to the averages for a vehicle class. So a vehicle could be aging at a worse or better rate than its competitors, and its ratings would vary. As an example, if a 2007 vehicle class was less reliable than vehicle X, then X gets a favorable rating. If that same vehicle class in 2010 is much more reliable (across all vehicles in the class), then the 2010 version of that vehicle could be average, because the competitors are much better now. So our candidate vehicle's ratings might change from 2007 to 2010, even though the vehicle might be identical. The change in rating would be due to the movement in the entire class.
Our vehicles are garage kept and we are in northern Illinois which can have very cold and brutal winters. I have been replacing batteries every 3-4 years on each vehicle. A decent battery can be bought for a little over a hundred dollars. This is a very small cost to incur to have peace of mind, especially if one lives in a cold weather part of the country.
How "likely" is your reasoning flawed that response rates are higher for lovers and haters of purchases?
When someone is looking for a recommendation for a used car to buy, do folks look only for a certain model year? Then, their recommendations may make a little more sense. I'm thinking most people don't shop like that, but for a range of model years.
..ok, ok..maybe that was a little harsh...but let's just say I don't hang off their every word. At best I may catch just a wind current draft of their word..
Actually, in the real world these things used to happen. In the UK, sabotage was not uncommon in the 60s, and so, too at Harley Davidson in the early 80s, and of course the infamous GM Lordstown plant.
I'll gladly spend $100 every 3-4 years to keep from being stranded or inconvenienced.
I've learned my lesson. My Suburban was almost exactly 4 years old when we had it loaded up for summer vacation. It was 5 am, had the kids sleeping in the back seat, boat was hooked up, got in and click. !@##, you gotta be kidding me. Thankfully I was able to get a battery from a Walmart Supercenter at 5:30am (still cost me over an hour due to what a PITA it was to get the battery out in the dark). I was one start away from possibly being stranded at a rest area. What away to start a vacation.
Unfortunately I didn't learn. When my Expedition was about exactly 4 years old, we were down at the lake when the battery died w/o warning. I couldn't even get it to start with the 50amp boost from my battery charger. Thankfully my wife's car was down there too, so I was able to run to Napa which was 20 miles away, basically lost most of the morning..
Never again, if I do keep the Ram more than 4 years, it's getting a battery before 4 years regardless of how it tests. I have a battery load tester, I've never been able to predict impending battery failure, it either tests fine or is dead. And that's across a variety of vehicles I have with batteries. Golf cart, waverunner, boat, camper, lawn tractor and of course vehicles. Seems like I buy batteries yearly for something.
To add to my data sample, now that I think about it, just about every vehicle we've owned has needed a battery replacement by 4 years. That would be our '94 Probe, '96 Mercury Villager, '00 Suburban, '01 Pathfinder, and my 07 Expedition. None had a battery last more than 4 years and they were all replaced when the vehicle wouldn't start due to a battery failure.
So no, a battery isn't an area I'm looking to save money.
Your battery experience mirrors mine. I don't think I've ever gone over 4 years. When I was young and poor I used ty try and recharge them and nurse them. Invariably they'd fail completely within a month or so if they were exhibiting signs of weakness. Nowadays I don't have time for that - the first sign of weakness and it's off to buy a new one. I don't really want to deal with an unrealiable vehicle.
Since I've been buying batteries at Costco, they're also usually prorated and end up costing very little, as they always return some significant credit. They never make it to the warrantied lifetime.
:shades:
:shades:
Some here no nothing about the real-life experience of cars that are not bare bones economy boxes. 4 years is about average. No big deal or annoyance. You get what you pay for.
My '94 Suburban needed battery changes every 2 years. The system checked OK until the 4th battery replacement indicated a failed alternator. Traded that sled in for the '03 Lincoln LS.
Another failure-prone GM from my past. (alternator, blown head gasket, water pump as well as dash board rattles it's entire life.).
Only here is a smallish positive in a domestic looked at disdainfully. Insert SNL 'Debbie Downer' music here.
How was that Lincoln LS? I haven't heard much good about them, although I always liked the looks of them.
Why would someone buy a battery when any auto parts store will test your battery for free? And someone mentioned "...at the first sign of weakness." I haven't experienced that sensation of slow cranking or dim lights in decades. I have had batteries die with no warning, although not in many, many years.
Seriously though, you said you've had zero issues with your Optima. Good for you. Hard to say it's anecdotal when it's your own personal experience, right? On that we'd agree I think.
Why would someone bother testing a 4 year old battery that died for no obvious reason (nothing left on etc)? If I have to remove it from the vehicle and haul it into an auto parts store, I'm going home with a new battery.
Not so sure that's the reason. I believe the largest electrical consumer in most cars by far is the headlights. What other electrical accessories would come close to those?
AutoZone batteries are generally pretty high ranked for performance, yet fairly reasonable in price to boot.
If I'm going to an auto store with a 4 yo battery that died, I'm leaving with a new one no matter what.