where are these "5-year dependability studies" found?
go here: http://www.jdpower.com/cc/auto/index.jsp then click "press releases" on the left and then type in "dependability" in the search box. Note that some years ago they changed from 5-year to 3-year timeframes.
another nice feature is to click on "automobile ratings" in the second column (instead of "press releases")
I have always felt that CR has a thinly veiled agenda. Their bias is against anything that costs a little more. I recognize that the most expensive is not automatically the best, but they seem to be of the opinion that the most expensive isn't ever the best. (At least, they used to be. I haven't kept up with them lately, not being in the market for anything they would be rating.)
CR has a bias against anything that costs more? Don't we all have the same bias? Why pay more for something that's no better than something that costs less? That's just common sense.
When the best is also the most expensive, they say so: For example, they say that the Lexus 430 is one of the best cars they ever tested, along with, I think. the Mercedes S and the old BMW 5 Series. Not exactly cheap transportation.
Hokay, I knew you were going to say this. I did qualify my statement by stating that it's been awhile since I've followed them. And yes, to some extent we all look for a bargain when practical. (I pick up pennies in the street, too.) That said, I have read CR ratings time and again that dismissed certain items solely because the good folks at CR felt they were too expensive. In at least some of those cases, I was very familiar with the products in question, and I felt they were well worth the extra expense.
CR is useful for certain things and not so much for others. I agree that for things like washing machines, vacuum cleaners, etc. they are a great resource. As for autos, the reliability info is nice, and I like the fact that they push car makers to make safer cars by not recommending cars that dont do well in government or insurance crash tests, and testing for things like roll over of trucks and SUVs long before the government started that (the Suzuki Samurai that CR went to court over is a good example of this).
Still, its just information from CR subscribers. I find it funny when people get bent out of shape or think there's something sinister or an agenda behind it (like CR hates domestic auto for example). Its just info. Take it or leave it.
I agree CR is useful for some things, less useful for others. For high-end hobby equipment, for example, stereo equipment, cameras, camcorders, etc. CR is less useful.
The reason is their audience is mainstream middle-class families with youngish kids, not people who want to buy $2,000 digital cameras, $3,000 camcorders, or $5,000 loudspeakers, etc.
"For high-end hobby equipment, for example, stereo equipment, cameras, camcorders, etc. CR is less useful."
I would say pretty much useLESS. Just a single score with little to no information is no way to shop for things like digital cameras, especially when there are so many different factors that weigh more with different people. CNET is very useful for entry to mid-level electronics. Beyond that, you have to go to the pros.
The reason is their audience is mainstream middle-class families with youngish kids, not people who want to buy $2,000 digital cameras, $3,000 camcorders, or $5,000 loudspeakers, etc.
Exactly. Hence the bias. But I agree that it's like anything else...you take out of it what is useful to you, and disregard the rest.
Bias? Maybe that's the right word, or maybe not. CR like any person or publication have certain criteria that they go by, which may not align with a particular reader's. They may feel that safety and reliability are relatively important while some readers may place greater importance on style and handling. No one is right or wrong, people just assign different weights to various factors. But at least, since they don't accept advertising at CR, their opinions on various products can be assumed to be free of commercial influence.
I am not a Consumer Reports expert. I would consult them on some things and I might even check out their FOR automotive ratings -- if I didn't have to buy the magazine.
If CR actually has a bias against things that cost more, well that would be a strike against them. I would hope they have a bias for things (e.g., cars) and their relative value.
To bring this back to LPS cars, my personal "value" bias was (past tense) such that I could not find cars that were of higher value than Audis. Of course my narrow (yes I admit it) qualifiers included that whatever I was looking at automotive must be AWD (so the field was certainly narrowed.)
But as I have stated, I priced an Audi A6 4.2 sport and found it within a few dollars of a 6 cylinder 5 series (and the Audi had a lower lease price and full maintenance -- which at the time the BMW did not). For the life of me -- at THAT time -- I could not understand why anyone would take a 6 cylinder RWD BMW when for slightly less money they could have an 8 cylinder AWD Audi of approximately similar dimensions. Please note I said, in effect, "that was then, this is now." Audi, and perhaps others, has "lost that lovin' feelin'" insofar as the value proposition is concerned.
CR may have thought -- then and/or now -- that the Audis were unreliable and would be "in the shop" a lot. Frankly that didn't happen to me and CR saying that such and such a car was in the bottom 25% of automotive reliability didn't alter my perception of value one bit.
Now, today, we have several excellent AWD LPS cars from which to choose. Audi, in my opinion, let its recent publicity go to its head, so to speak. Their temporary status as "Best Car in the World" has caused them from what I can tell to sharply increase the cost of ownership of their vehicles. With all the great and wonderful competition out there, the rapid run up in this aspect of Audi ownership forced folks like me to look elsewhere to vet the value proposition.
Some people stayed the course, some went to BMW, Lexus or to Infiniti (which is what I did). CR is a resource. For me it is an incidental resource when it comes to automobiles -- I hope they look for value not just automatically begin to lean more negative (pertaining to cars) as the price goes up as if to say "no car is worth -- fill in the blank."
Anyway the current crop of cars offers consumers the best and most choice I can remember in some 35+ years of driving. If CR withered away, I wouldn't even notice, at this point.
I am a long time subscriber of CR and find them a useful opinion. Are they biased? Of course. We ALL have our biases, worldviews, presuppositions, etc. We all wear colored glasses (rose or whatever) to view the world with! I agree with the many posters who have pointed out that CR is biased towards "practicality" for the middle-class.
HOWEVER, I believe that bias is manifested in what they choose to test and not so much in the reported results of the test. CR is known for ranking products from top to bottom based on results and not on price. Only when products tie in quality/results does CR use price for a tie-breaker; and of course CR is well-known for their "Best Picks," but more often than not the so-called "Best Pick" is NOT the best or rated #1 - often a "Best Pick" is in the upper third of the rankings and available at an especially good price relative to the others.
Specific to vehicles, CR always ranks from hightest score to lowest score independant of price and makes "Recommendations" based on performance, safety, anmd reliability. I can NOT recall when CR has ever "Recommended" a vehicle based on price. Please refer to the Issue, where CR has ever made a vehicle recommendation based on price alone.
Yup. CR is definitely biased towards value for the middle class consumer. Especially evident when they review luxury cars and SUV's. They always state that there are cheaper alternatives which are as good as the expensive vehicles under review.
You are right. The best example is when CR printed the loaded Accord was the better alternative for $7K less than the Acura. Of course, the Acura folk took exception and said they accrue $7K worth of luxury and amenities.
I guess the value proposition is only useful when comparing German vs. Japanese.
Good Choice ...We've had definitive technology speakers in our home for about a year now...love the built in subwoofer controls in the 3 front speakers. A notch above the bose surround sound in the RL but then 10 bose speakers inside any auto compartment is certainly enough. If you tune a 5.1 surround sound dvd-audio disc up to about a 25 volume level in the new RL it's really superb.
I like Definitive's new "Mythos" plasma oriented speakers a lot. However, their traditional powered bi-polar towers never sat well with me, as they were clearly HEAVILY inspired by Mirage's original M-1 and M-3. Ian Paisley (Mirage's founder\designer) has said he still regrets not getting a patent for a bi-polar speaker, and while he's never named any names, the Def Tech's are the only speakers I know of that are almost dead ringers for the old Mirages, gloss black end caps and all.
The DT's sound though is excellent, they definitely rank up there with Dynaudio, Von Schweikert, and Mirage of course, as some of the best sounding speakers on the planet.
Anyone who thinks CR is "completely unbiased" is joking or "truly naive". Did anyone read the "veterinarian expose" they did? Could they be a little more biased? They are great for household products and items, and I enjoy their "are these claims true" section, but I would not judge them as the experts on automobiles (reliability evaluations or otherwise).
I subscribe to CR, as do most of you guys, but I recognize which items are simple enough to test as they do and judge with a single 5 point system dot, and which aren't...
I don't know why they even attempt to review luxury cars and SUV's. There's always that annoying and stupid statement accompanying the review that you can buy a Toyota, Honda or Nissan that is just as good for much less money.
Yep...gloss black end caps and great sound. Our next buy will be an HD TV, which by the way I have really put off probably because the Networks keep blowing past the deadlines on getting their act together with HD programming but it will happen within the next year. I like the Sharp LCD but Plazma keeps getting better and still haven't ruled out rear projection... any recommendations?
More than a few friends have asked me the same question. Unfortunately there's no easy answer. HDTV is very slowly improving, but there still isnt much out there. InHD, HDNet, and DiscoveryHD Theater are 100% HD channels, but most Cable and Sat providers either cant or wont offer all three. I also have HD HBO, Cinemax, and Showtime. When the movies on these channels are recent and they do a good job with the upconversion, the results are stunning, and blow DVD away (even when upconverted to 1080i by my Hitachi). However, if the movies are older or the HD conversion job is mediocre, it doesnt look all that much better than regular digital cable. I think it will be either BlueRay or HD-DVD that steps in and saves the day to finally start driving HDTV sales in large scale. The broadcast industry is just moving much to slowly.
As to buy an HDTV or not, I think what I would ask is how large your screen is now, and is your TV about to kick the bucket, or will it survive a few more years? Also, if you watch a lot of DVD movies, it may be worth it just for the widescreen aspect ratio. I wouldn't buy an HDTV today JUST for the HD. Also, if you still watch a lot of traditional analog cable, the results may be painful on a digital HD set. In my experience they just arent able to handle such low res garbage well. HDTVs DO improve digital cable and DVD though...just dont expect it to match HD level, even if its upconverted to the same 1080i (or 720p for digitals).
As for me, my current set is a Hitachi CRT rear projection HD set that I bought in 2003. Even though CRT rear-pros are on their way out, I went that way for a few reasons. In 2003, digital LCD or DLP based rear projection sets cost twice as much for the same screen size, and in terms of visual quality they couldn't come within a country mile of CRT. The Hitachi replaced an analog tube, so its 24" of depth wasnt a problem. It does weigh about 250lbs, but it sits on the floor and has wheels so it isnt hard to move around. The only annoying thing about moving it is that the guns have to be re-converged manually. (So called automatic convergience is worthless).
Prices of DLP and LCD rear-pro sets have come down, (and they've been joined by relative new comer LCOS), but prices of CRT sets are down as well. A 50" CRT rear pro now costs around $1400, vs. maybe $2500 for an LCD or DLP. CRT is still the best looking form of rear projection available, but DLP sets from Samsung, Mitsubishi, and Toshiba continue to edge closer.
LCDs from Sony and Hitachi have also improved, and Hitachi's new "Cineform" series of LCD rear-projections have easily the most attractive cabinets on the market. However, LCD still has two major problems. 1. Black level - when in a totally dark room, black objects on an LCD screen will be a washed out gray. 2. The "screen door effect" - LCD technology requires much bigger gaps between pixels than DLP or LCOS, and these gaps are noticable (like looking through a screen door), especially on the larger sets.
The one big proponent for LCOS in consumer digital rear pro's is JVC. Their sets have gotten very mixed reviews. LCOS has proven to be very difficult to manufacture, and thus you have a much greater chance of a DOA set from JVC than from LCD or DLP, so I would stay away from them.
The advantages that all three digital rear projection formats have across the board is that they are much cheaper than plasma or LCD flat panels, they weigh half as much and are half as deep as CRT rear projections, and unlike Plasma and CRT, there are no phosphors to "burn in". You can view SDTV in 4:3 with black bars, view digital photos, or use them as computer monitors all without any worry of damaging the screen. The major disadvantage - bulb life. They need new bulbs every 6,000 - 8,000 hours of power on time. The bulbs are user replacable, but they are $150-300 a pop.
Finally, if you decide you just MUST have a hang on the wall TV, I would suggest that you go with plasma, and specifically a Panasonic plasma. Panasonic has worked some sort of magic to get their plasmas to display fairly deep blacks, which pretty much all the rest I've seen, except for the $15K+ ones, cant match. LCD flat panels will improve, and may eventually overtake Plasma, but for now they cost WAY too much money, and they cant match Plasma on picture quality. Plasma's biggest problems, burn-in and lifespan, have pretty much been fixed. I still wouldnt leave a movie on pause for 24 hours, but accidental damage from things like news tickers are no longer a problem. Plasmas are now said to last for as long as 80,000 hours, so you wont have to worry about having a very expensive paper weight in 4 to 5 years.
The best buy in a HD plasma set right this minute is Panasonic's 50" TH-50PX50U, which retails at $4999, which is actually a very reasonable price. (Its also available in 42" also HD, not ED for just $3500.
Plasma has a "half-life" of sorts, where it be at half of its original brightness, and then eventually it will no longer work at all. This half-life has been extended from 4 years or so for the early sets to 10 years or more for the current models. Digital rear pros can beat that, but you'll have to spend thousands of dollars on bulb replacements.
I am considering a RWD the deal is much, much better. I am going to purchase today. I live in Pittsburgh and any feedback on how it might handle in the winter would help. Thanks
If you wish to drive in all conditions, you'll want a good set of snow tires (the experts recommend dedicated rims, too). I have A/S on mine, but I also have a FWD that I can use on the three or so days a year I don't want to take out the bimmer (I live in the DC area).
Wow, you're the man. Impressive breakdown of HDTV options. When Sony came out with their first HDTV CRT Projection w/ built-in HD decoder (XBR series), I demo'd it and grabbed one of the first few units that got to the store. That was 3-4 years ago. To do that TV justice, 6 months later I upgraded my hometheater gear from a cheapo Kenwood system to the Def-Tech 3000 system (BP3000TL, CLR3000, BPVX/P). My next step is to move from a receiver to separate components. That will take considerable planning (and mojo).
In term of picture quality, I haven't seen any of the newer flat-screen sets (LCD, LCos, Plasma) that can match my Sony yet. As you had mentioned, the culprits in those newer sets (among others) are black level and refresh rate. However for coventional viewings, their superior brightness, wider view angle and less space-demanding are hard to beat. In fact, I've been thinking of getting an LCD set to hang in my dinningroom.
As for the Def-Tech sound: excellent surround-sound productions (movies and music) and one of the bests stereo sounds. Personally, I prefer the B&W 801 Matrix for 2-channel listening. Last month a local dealer had a special 50% discount on those babies (B&W). At a retail of $16,000 they're appalling, but at $8000 they were quite tempting.
Anyways, my apology to the Host for straying. Let's get back to LPS discussion.
As crazy as it sounds, LCD, DLP, LCOS, Plasma, and LCD flat panel wont be the end of it. There are at least two more types of digital light processors on the horizon. As if there wasnt enough to keep track of already.
What A\V receiver do you use now? I ask because before moving to power amps and a SSP, you may want to look at flagship receivers such as Denon's AVR-5805 or Onkyo's TX-NR1000. They sound just as good as most entry level seperates, and being receivers are on the absolute cutting edge of HT technologies such as offering multiple FireWire ports and HDMI switching, things that SSPs wont have for at least another year or so. The Onkyo is particularly impressive because its modular architecture allows nearly all of its components and ports to be upgraded like a computer, making it *almost* future-proof. If you really want to step up from what a receiver can offer though, I would highly recommend Anthem "Statement" or Parasound "Halo" series.
My apologies pat, HT is my other favorite subject besides cars, and I really cant help myself sometimes.
tom43, with a set of Blizzaks, you should be fine.
Sorry Pat I knew we had an expert aboard in Lexusguy and couldn't resist asking for his expertise...my fault. I spent the weekend in Door County which is Wisconsin's answer to Long Island, one of the most beautiful areas in the country, a strip of land that juts out into Lake Michigan for about 60 miles to the east of Green Bay. Lots of hills and hairpin curvy roads...gave the RL a real workout. Great fun! The SH AWD is amazingly effective but it would take a professional driver to detect it...very smooth!
I've made my home email address available in my profile, so if you have any more questions about any HT stuff, please feel free to email me. That way I can avoid making the hosts too annoyed with my electronics ramblings.
syswei, I just dont get any enjoyment out of arguing HT, so I dont really like HT forums. HT arguments are kind of 1 dimensional. For example, I dont like the way B&W speakers sound. Since there arent any other aspects to talk about, it just doesnt make for good discussion. There's a lot more to a car than a loudspeaker, so even though I dont particularly like the way the latest BMWs look, and I dont like iDrive, I still have interest in what BMW drivers have to say.
I have spent time in Door County every summer for the past 6 years and the area has been called one of the best vacation spots in the United States. Great 2-lane roads for some spirited driving action!
At this point in technology, unless you want to spend big dollars you will be waiting at least another year or two for a decent plasma set (decent in part meaning its ability to display the "color black.") Check out the DLP LCD comparo in Sound and Vision's new issue. They give the nod to DLP -- but they end up comparing it to CRT based HDTV's -- if you must have a flatter TV, today, DLP still is "almost" as good as a CRT - HD-RPTV (which can be had sometimes at Costco for a couple grand).
Since we do want to at least give a nod to LPS cars -- what technology are the screens in these cars navi systems (LCD?) Sometimes they seem fine, but often they wash out in the sun pretty easily.
well my definitives will be about 5 years old this december. I've the 4 of the original 3000 TL powered towers for front two and side two, a powered front center & 2 unpowered for the rear two channels. I have the original denon 5800 which was one of the first commercial 7.1... and of course, i don't have any subwoofer, never needed one.... now if i could get that kinda system into a car... nice....
i've my rear projection mitsu HDTV since 2000 dec. it's been good with all available signals till date. once my theater in the basement project is completed... in a few more months, i'll be moving to a DLP true projection system.... i'm still toying with the different brands.
I agree with lexguy, panasonics and NEC's are the best bet in plasma right now... absolutely power-bang for the buck and some of the truest reproduction
Personally, i've never really liked Sony in any of the newer electronics, plus despite their brand name price premium, they don't have any products that are in the top tier...
on the component side, i tend to go with Denon, there upper end receivers in the 3500~5500 range are a no mistake buy.... i tend to get my players, DVD, CD etc either Denon or Pioneer/Pioneer Elite. On the TV's im increasingly getting biased towards Panasonic & NEC (i own niether at the moment).
Good question about the navi screens. I personally think the screen on my A6 is much sharper in appearance than my wife's TL nav. Hers is definitely LCD. I've been told that Audi uses something else, which looks better but has a shorter half-life (maybe 7 years?)...
I heard that the LCD's don't tolerate temperatures as well, but can't say so from experience...
Somehow I knew you would be coming into the discussion with your expertise as well. Thanks.
You are right about the navi screen washing out in the sun or even in the daytime brightness period. I tweek mine on occasion to bring out enough contrast...and it also seems like Acura RL has enough light panel selections to get it right one way or the other. It adjusts for both day and night visibility with about 6 different background color combos that are fun to experiment with.
I grew up with this slogan, or one really close to it, anyway. And, I have never owned a Buick, my parents never owned a Buick and my friends who actually did buy a Buick did so because they could get one for $1,500 -- and it was a "tank." Now, I wonder if Buick is at all relevant (I even have wondered from time to time if Cadillac is relevant). I am pretty much convinced Pontiac is dead but I'm also sure no one has bothered to tell it about its fate.
For all practical purposes we are now left with but two of GM's car lines, Chevrolet and Cadillac. Indeed, even these venerable brands are in jeopardy as long as Buick and Pontiac are allowed to continue sucking the life out of the rest of GM. If you asked me neither Buick or Pontiac has much of anything worth saving. At least Oldsmobile had the Aurora to be proud of. Fat lot of good that did them.
It is time to stop pussyfootin' around and kill Buick and Pontiac before they totally drain the General of all of his remaining powers.
Either that or it's time for someone to buy GM and put it out of our collective misery.
I know this is the LPS forum (i.e., Buicks need not apply) -- but I grew up in a time when cars from Buick would have been included in such a forum (if we only had the Internet, that is.) Now, two or three Germans and a like number of Japanese overshadow virtually all the other cars produced on the Planet Earth. You'd think we could reverse engineer them, innovate just a little (innovate, I said, not invent) and "Build a Better Car" (also part of a years gone by slogan, "When Better Cars Are Build, Buick Will Build Them") at a competitive price. Even Cadillac seems to be in a funk with what should've been a winner of a car -- the STS. Poor GM can't seem to catch a break -- the new STS is hardly the household word that had been hoped for. And the CTS (a relative success) really just soldiers on pretty much unchanged since it was first brought to market some three years ago. Instead of bringing out a half-baked STS, the CTS "coulda, shoulda, oughta" been upgraded to compete head - on with the BMW 5, Audi A6 and Mercedes E class. But noooooooooooooo. This otherwise fine car has been left like a water melon too long on the vine -- and, it is starting to spoil.
If someone from GM is monitoring this, it is time to get with the LPS program and bring some cars to market that will get the kind of buzz and generate the kind of passion we see here for Acura, Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Lexus, Mercedes (and sometimes Jaguar).
I am cautiously optimistic that GM can "pull up" before they go flying off like the son of Daedalus.
A final thought, "No, I guess I really wouldn't really rather BE a Buick, but I'm glad I use Dial. . .don't you wish everyone did?"
Its pretty clear that GM doesnt want to kill off any more brands. When Bob Lutz mentioned that might be a possibility, GM management was VERY quick to say, no, we're not doing that. Its not as simple as somebody up top pulling a lever and boom, no more Buick. Eliminating Oldsmobile cost GM LOTS of money in dealer compensation, and they dont want to repeat that.
GM's current plan is to instead seriously reduce the amount of pointless model overlap. Why does their "excitement division" have a minivan? Thats what they want to fix.
"General Motors wants to restrict the Buick and Pontiac model offerings to just four different cars each, and market the cars along the lines of successful brands like Mini and Porsche.
That's how GM sales and marketing chief Mark LaNeve wants to revive the two struggling North American brands, which many analysts fear will go the way of Oldsmobile unless they start to perform better.
"In a few years, Mini will have three or four models that's where Porsche is now," he told the International Motor Press Association in New York."
Fixing Saturn and Saab apparently arent as big of a priority. I think Cadillac's biggest problem right now is their rediculous prices. The CTS-V seemed reasonable, until the 300C SRT8 came along. But what happened with cars like the STS-V and XLR-V? Who is going to pay AMG prices for a warmed over Cadillac?
I think overall that plan is the smartest thing I've yet seen from GM. The thing is though they'll have to shrink in order to do this. This is where the unions and dealers are going to be a problem.
They may not have mentioned Saturn but Saturn is already being tended too. The new SKY and Aura are going to help them out a lot, or at least they should.
I think you're right about Cadillac's pricing. Even over on the Cadillac boards long time Cadillacers don't like it, especially the STS. The XLR-V is going to be a 90K car. That is pricey for a Cadillac but their logic is that it offers much of what the SL55 has for about 30K less. We'll see if that holds because so far the regular XLR hasn't come close to meeting sales projections. I'm not sure what the STS is doing.
No, I'm pretty sure Tiger Woods isn't driving a Buick (although he may wear a Tag Heuer watch).
But here's a question: how many people do you think decide to buy a Buick because he's in the commercial? Are buyers really that gullible and make buying decisions based on phony endorsements? Do you think these ads are successful, or is GM just wasting its money paying him X millions or whatever for his "endorsement"? I want to have faith that the Ameican public is smarter than that, but experience too often proves me wrong.
Comments
go here: http://www.jdpower.com/cc/auto/index.jsp
then click "press releases" on the left and then type in "dependability" in the search box. Note that some years ago they changed from 5-year to 3-year timeframes.
another nice feature is to click on "automobile ratings" in the second column (instead of "press releases")
Interesting stuff. Looks like my Lincoln may last until I'm tired of it.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
When the best is also the most expensive, they say so: For example, they say that the Lexus 430 is one of the best cars they ever tested, along with, I think. the Mercedes S and the old BMW 5 Series. Not exactly cheap transportation.
Still, its just information from CR subscribers. I find it funny when people get bent out of shape or think there's something sinister or an agenda behind it (like CR hates domestic auto for example). Its just info. Take it or leave it.
...and some of us leave our biases behind...gulp...
The reason is their audience is mainstream middle-class families with youngish kids, not people who want to buy $2,000 digital cameras, $3,000 camcorders, or $5,000 loudspeakers, etc.
I would say pretty much useLESS. Just a single score with little to no information is no way to shop for things like digital cameras, especially when there are so many different factors that weigh more with different people. CNET is very useful for entry to mid-level electronics. Beyond that, you have to go to the pros.
Exactly. Hence the bias. But I agree that it's like anything else...you take out of it what is useful to you, and disregard the rest.
If CR actually has a bias against things that cost more, well that would be a strike against them. I would hope they have a bias for things (e.g., cars) and their relative value.
To bring this back to LPS cars, my personal "value" bias was (past tense) such that I could not find cars that were of higher value than Audis. Of course my narrow (yes I admit it) qualifiers included that whatever I was looking at automotive must be AWD (so the field was certainly narrowed.)
But as I have stated, I priced an Audi A6 4.2 sport and found it within a few dollars of a 6 cylinder 5 series (and the Audi had a lower lease price and full maintenance -- which at the time the BMW did not). For the life of me -- at THAT time -- I could not understand why anyone would take a 6 cylinder RWD BMW when for slightly less money they could have an 8 cylinder AWD Audi of approximately similar dimensions. Please note I said, in effect, "that was then, this is now." Audi, and perhaps others, has "lost that lovin' feelin'" insofar as the value proposition is concerned.
CR may have thought -- then and/or now -- that the Audis were unreliable and would be "in the shop" a lot. Frankly that didn't happen to me and CR saying that such and such a car was in the bottom 25% of automotive reliability didn't alter my perception of value one bit.
Now, today, we have several excellent AWD LPS cars from which to choose. Audi, in my opinion, let its recent publicity go to its head, so to speak. Their temporary status as "Best Car in the World" has caused them from what I can tell to sharply increase the cost of ownership of their vehicles. With all the great and wonderful competition out there, the rapid run up in this aspect of Audi ownership forced folks like me to look elsewhere to vet the value proposition.
Some people stayed the course, some went to BMW, Lexus or to Infiniti (which is what I did). CR is a resource. For me it is an incidental resource when it comes to automobiles -- I hope they look for value not just automatically begin to lean more negative (pertaining to cars) as the price goes up as if to say "no car is worth -- fill in the blank."
Anyway the current crop of cars offers consumers the best and most choice I can remember in some 35+ years of driving. If CR withered away, I wouldn't even notice, at this point.
HOWEVER, I believe that bias is manifested in what they choose to test and not so much in the reported results of the test. CR is known for ranking products from top to bottom based on results and not on price. Only when products tie in quality/results does CR use price for a tie-breaker; and of course CR is well-known for their "Best Picks," but more often than not the so-called "Best Pick" is NOT the best or rated #1 - often a "Best Pick" is in the upper third of the rankings and available at an especially good price relative to the others.
Specific to vehicles, CR always ranks from hightest score to lowest score independant of price and makes "Recommendations" based on performance, safety, anmd reliability. I can NOT recall when CR has ever "Recommended" a vehicle based on price. Please refer to the Issue, where CR has ever made a vehicle recommendation based on price alone.
I guess the value proposition is only useful when comparing German vs. Japanese.
The DT's sound though is excellent, they definitely rank up there with Dynaudio, Von Schweikert, and Mirage of course, as some of the best sounding speakers on the planet.
I subscribe to CR, as do most of you guys, but I recognize which items are simple enough to test as they do and judge with a single 5 point system dot, and which aren't...
As to buy an HDTV or not, I think what I would ask is how large your screen is now, and is your TV about to kick the bucket, or will it survive a few more years? Also, if you watch a lot of DVD movies, it may be worth it just for the widescreen aspect ratio. I wouldn't buy an HDTV today JUST for the HD. Also, if you still watch a lot of traditional analog cable, the results may be painful on a digital HD set. In my experience they just arent able to handle such low res garbage well. HDTVs DO improve digital cable and DVD though...just dont expect it to match HD level, even if its upconverted to the same 1080i (or 720p for digitals).
As for me, my current set is a Hitachi CRT rear projection HD set that I bought in 2003. Even though CRT rear-pros are on their way out, I went that way for a few reasons. In 2003, digital LCD or DLP based rear projection sets cost twice as much for the same screen size, and in terms of visual quality they couldn't come within a country mile of CRT. The Hitachi replaced an analog tube, so its 24" of depth wasnt a problem. It does weigh about 250lbs, but it sits on the floor and has wheels so it isnt hard to move around. The only annoying thing about moving it is that the guns have to be re-converged manually. (So called automatic convergience is worthless).
Prices of DLP and LCD rear-pro sets have come down, (and they've been joined by relative new comer LCOS), but prices of CRT sets are down as well. A 50" CRT rear pro now costs around $1400, vs. maybe $2500 for an LCD or DLP. CRT is still the best looking form of rear projection available, but DLP sets from Samsung, Mitsubishi, and Toshiba continue to edge closer.
LCDs from Sony and Hitachi have also improved, and Hitachi's new "Cineform" series of LCD rear-projections have easily the most attractive cabinets on the market. However, LCD still has two major problems. 1. Black level - when in a totally dark room, black objects on an LCD screen will be a washed out gray. 2. The "screen door effect" - LCD technology requires much bigger gaps between pixels than DLP or LCOS, and these gaps are noticable (like looking through a screen door), especially on the larger sets.
The one big proponent for LCOS in consumer digital rear pro's is JVC. Their sets have gotten very mixed reviews. LCOS has proven to be very difficult to manufacture, and thus you have a much greater chance of a DOA set from JVC than from LCD or DLP, so I would stay away from them.
The advantages that all three digital rear projection formats have across the board is that they are much cheaper than plasma or LCD flat panels, they weigh half as much and are half as deep as CRT rear projections, and unlike Plasma and CRT, there are no phosphors to "burn in". You can view SDTV in 4:3 with black bars, view digital photos, or use them as computer monitors all without any worry of damaging the screen. The major disadvantage - bulb life. They need new bulbs every 6,000 - 8,000 hours of power on time. The bulbs are user replacable, but they are $150-300 a pop.
Finally, if you decide you just MUST have a hang on the wall TV, I would suggest that you go with plasma, and specifically a Panasonic plasma. Panasonic has worked some sort of magic to get their plasmas to display fairly deep blacks, which pretty much all the rest I've seen, except for the $15K+ ones, cant match. LCD flat panels will improve, and may eventually overtake Plasma, but for now they cost WAY too much money, and they cant match Plasma on picture quality. Plasma's biggest problems, burn-in and lifespan, have pretty much been fixed. I still wouldnt leave a movie on pause for 24 hours, but accidental damage from things like news tickers are no longer a problem. Plasmas are now said to last for as long as 80,000 hours, so you wont have to worry about having a very expensive paper weight in 4 to 5 years.
The best buy in a HD plasma set right this minute is Panasonic's 50" TH-50PX50U, which retails at $4999, which is actually a very reasonable price. (Its also available in 42" also HD, not ED for just $3500.
Panasonic TH-50PX50U
As for digital rear pros, I would suggest taking a look at the 50" Samsung HLR5067 ($2800)
Samsung HLR5067
Or, Toshiba's 52" 52HMX94 ($3000)
Toshiba 52HMX94
In term of picture quality, I haven't seen any of the newer flat-screen sets (LCD, LCos, Plasma) that can match my Sony yet. As you had mentioned, the culprits in those newer sets (among others) are black level and refresh rate. However for coventional viewings, their superior brightness, wider view angle and less space-demanding are hard to beat. In fact, I've been thinking of getting an LCD set to hang in my dinningroom.
As for the Def-Tech sound: excellent surround-sound productions (movies and music) and one of the bests stereo sounds. Personally, I prefer the B&W 801 Matrix for 2-channel listening. Last month a local dealer had a special 50% discount on those babies (B&W). At a retail of $16,000 they're appalling, but at $8000 they were quite tempting.
Anyways, my apology to the Host for straying. Let's get back to LPS discussion.
Yup, that would be a good thing...
What A\V receiver do you use now? I ask because before moving to power amps and a SSP, you may want to look at flagship receivers such as Denon's AVR-5805 or Onkyo's TX-NR1000. They sound just as good as most entry level seperates, and being receivers are on the absolute cutting edge of HT technologies such as offering multiple FireWire ports and HDMI switching, things that SSPs wont have for at least another year or so. The Onkyo is particularly impressive because its modular architecture allows nearly all of its components and ports to be upgraded like a computer, making it *almost* future-proof. If you really want to step up from what a receiver can offer though, I would highly recommend Anthem "Statement" or Parasound "Halo" series.
My apologies pat, HT is my other favorite subject besides cars, and I really cant help myself sometimes.
tom43, with a set of Blizzaks, you should be fine.
syswei, I just dont get any enjoyment out of arguing HT, so I dont really like HT forums. HT arguments are kind of 1 dimensional. For example, I dont like the way B&W speakers sound. Since there arent any other aspects to talk about, it just doesnt make for good discussion. There's a lot more to a car than a loudspeaker, so even though I dont particularly like the way the latest BMWs look, and I dont like iDrive, I still have interest in what BMW drivers have to say.
Since we do want to at least give a nod to LPS cars -- what technology are the screens in these cars navi systems (LCD?) Sometimes they seem fine, but often they wash out in the sun pretty easily.
I agree with lexguy, panasonics and NEC's are the best bet in plasma right now... absolutely power-bang for the buck and some of the truest reproduction
Personally, i've never really liked Sony in any of the newer electronics, plus despite their brand name price premium, they don't have any products that are in the top tier...
on the component side, i tend to go with Denon, there upper end receivers in the 3500~5500 range are a no mistake buy.... i tend to get my players, DVD, CD etc either Denon or Pioneer/Pioneer Elite. On the TV's im increasingly getting biased towards Panasonic & NEC (i own niether at the moment).
Good question about the navi screens. I personally think the screen on my A6 is much sharper in appearance than my wife's TL nav. Hers is definitely LCD. I've been told that Audi uses something else, which looks better but has a shorter half-life (maybe 7 years?)...
I heard that the LCD's don't tolerate temperatures as well, but can't say so from experience...
You are right about the navi screen washing out in the sun or even in the daytime brightness period. I tweek mine on occasion to bring out enough contrast...and it also seems like Acura RL has enough light panel selections to get it right one way or the other. It adjusts for both day and night visibility with about 6 different background color combos that are fun to experiment with.
For all practical purposes we are now left with but two of GM's car lines, Chevrolet and Cadillac. Indeed, even these venerable brands are in jeopardy as long as Buick and Pontiac are allowed to continue sucking the life out of the rest of GM. If you asked me neither Buick or Pontiac has much of anything worth saving. At least Oldsmobile had the Aurora to be proud of. Fat lot of good that did them.
It is time to stop pussyfootin' around and kill Buick and Pontiac before they totally drain the General of all of his remaining powers.
Either that or it's time for someone to buy GM and put it out of our collective misery.
I know this is the LPS forum (i.e., Buicks need not apply) -- but I grew up in a time when cars from Buick would have been included in such a forum (if we only had the Internet, that is.) Now, two or three Germans and a like number of Japanese overshadow virtually all the other cars produced on the Planet Earth. You'd think we could reverse engineer them, innovate just a little (innovate, I said, not invent) and "Build a Better Car" (also part of a years gone by slogan, "When Better Cars Are Build, Buick Will Build Them") at a competitive price. Even Cadillac seems to be in a funk with what should've been a winner of a car -- the STS. Poor GM can't seem to catch a break -- the new STS is hardly the household word that had been hoped for. And the CTS (a relative success) really just soldiers on pretty much unchanged since it was first brought to market some three years ago. Instead of bringing out a half-baked STS, the CTS "coulda, shoulda, oughta" been upgraded to compete head - on with the BMW 5, Audi A6 and Mercedes E class. But noooooooooooooo. This otherwise fine car has been left like a water melon too long on the vine -- and, it is starting to spoil.
If someone from GM is monitoring this, it is time to get with the LPS program and bring some cars to market that will get the kind of buzz and generate the kind of passion we see here for Acura, Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Lexus, Mercedes (and sometimes Jaguar).
I am cautiously optimistic that GM can "pull up" before they go flying off like the son of Daedalus.
A final thought, "No, I guess I really wouldn't really rather BE a Buick, but I'm glad I use Dial. . .don't you wish everyone did?"
GM's current plan is to instead seriously reduce the amount of pointless model overlap. Why does their "excitement division" have a minivan? Thats what they want to fix.
"General Motors wants to restrict the Buick and Pontiac model offerings to just four different cars each, and market the cars along the lines of successful brands like Mini and Porsche.
That's how GM sales and marketing chief Mark LaNeve wants to revive the two struggling North American brands, which many analysts fear will go the way of Oldsmobile unless they start to perform better.
"In a few years, Mini will have three or four models that's where Porsche is now," he told the International Motor Press Association in New York."
Fixing Saturn and Saab apparently arent as big of a priority. I think Cadillac's biggest problem right now is their rediculous prices. The CTS-V seemed reasonable, until the 300C SRT8 came along. But what happened with cars like the STS-V and XLR-V? Who is going to pay AMG prices for a warmed over Cadillac?
They may not have mentioned Saturn but Saturn is already being tended too. The new SKY and Aura are going to help them out a lot, or at least they should.
I think you're right about Cadillac's pricing. Even over on the Cadillac boards long time Cadillacers don't like it, especially the STS. The XLR-V is going to be a 90K car. That is pricey for a Cadillac but their logic is that it offers much of what the SL55 has for about 30K less. We'll see if that holds because so far the regular XLR hasn't come close to meeting sales projections. I'm not sure what the STS is doing.
M
But here's a question: how many people do you think decide to buy a Buick because he's in the commercial? Are buyers really that gullible and make buying decisions based on phony endorsements? Do you think these ads are successful, or is GM just wasting its money paying him X millions or whatever for his "endorsement"? I want to have faith that the Ameican public is smarter than that, but experience too often proves me wrong.