Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Edmunds car ratings- inconsistent with reviews?
I'm not sure where else to put this, but it's not technically a problem with the site, so much as a bit of perplexity at the editor's inconsistency.
Basically, while perusing the new 'grades' for the cars, I compared the 'B' rated Escape's 'report card' against the 'A' rated CR-V's.
I also spend a lot of time reading the reviews.
Edmunds actually has a comparison of the two up, in which the CR-V wins (I disagree, but at least they state their reasons). In that review, I also read the captions on the photos. One of which states, succinctly, that the Escape is by far the better driving / handling of the two, with more power, etc.
The power part is the only bit consistent in the drivetrain scores of the report cards. The Honda gets an A for both steering and handling, areas where the review makes it clear that even the test staff found the Escape superior. Yet, somehow the Escape earns a 'B' for both of these categories.
Would that have been enough to swing an 'A' overall for the Escape, or conversely (if lowering the CR-V's from A to
drop the CR-V to a 'B'?
I don't know.
What I do know is that everyone here and elsewhere agrees- while the CR-V may be the utility champ of everymoms everywhere, the Escape is easily the Ferrari of the class. The ratings don't reflect this. The Escape should be rated higher than the CR-V for areas in which it is superior.
Is this a matter of Edmunds' preference for the Honda influencing the report card? I hope not- this is supposed to be a subjective thing, allowing people to comparison shop. The article does that well enough, even if some may not place as great an emphasis on utility (while others may!), and presents the strengths and weaknesses of each clearly, allowing the reader to make a decision of which meets his or her needs and wants better.
The Ratings do not reflect the same..
I welcome feedback, especially from Edmunds.
Basically, while perusing the new 'grades' for the cars, I compared the 'B' rated Escape's 'report card' against the 'A' rated CR-V's.
I also spend a lot of time reading the reviews.
Edmunds actually has a comparison of the two up, in which the CR-V wins (I disagree, but at least they state their reasons). In that review, I also read the captions on the photos. One of which states, succinctly, that the Escape is by far the better driving / handling of the two, with more power, etc.
The power part is the only bit consistent in the drivetrain scores of the report cards. The Honda gets an A for both steering and handling, areas where the review makes it clear that even the test staff found the Escape superior. Yet, somehow the Escape earns a 'B' for both of these categories.
Would that have been enough to swing an 'A' overall for the Escape, or conversely (if lowering the CR-V's from A to
drop the CR-V to a 'B'?I don't know.
What I do know is that everyone here and elsewhere agrees- while the CR-V may be the utility champ of everymoms everywhere, the Escape is easily the Ferrari of the class. The ratings don't reflect this. The Escape should be rated higher than the CR-V for areas in which it is superior.
Is this a matter of Edmunds' preference for the Honda influencing the report card? I hope not- this is supposed to be a subjective thing, allowing people to comparison shop. The article does that well enough, even if some may not place as great an emphasis on utility (while others may!), and presents the strengths and weaknesses of each clearly, allowing the reader to make a decision of which meets his or her needs and wants better.
The Ratings do not reflect the same..
I welcome feedback, especially from Edmunds.
0
Comments
I test drove an Escape (both 2.0 and 1.6), Mazda CX-5, Honda CRV and Toyota RAV-4. I put the Escape AWD Titanium at the top of my list. Followed by the CX-5, 1.6 Escape, CRV and RAV-4. But that's just my opinion obviously others rank them differently.
Specifically, I thought the CRV was unimaginative, boring to drive, inadequate HP but good basic transportation. But that's what a lot of people like (maybe even the reviewer).
Bottom line: to each their own.
Fact- they liked the driving experience of the Escape FAR better, from handling, steering, power, etc., than the CR-V, and said so in the article, regardless of their final overall subjective choice of 'winner' (based on 'utility' and family friendliness, at least according to their reasoning).
Fact- the Honda has more space
Fact- the Escape doesn't do as well for fuel economy
Of the above three things, the latter two are correctly depicted when comparing grades in the 'Ratings' for each vehicle. The first (handling and steering) are reversed from the information provided in the comparison (information echoed everywhere else that reviews and comparisons have been done).
So there is a discrepancy that needs corrected, or I'll have to start discounting Edmunds as a useful site for unbiased information (the car 'facts' part, not the reviewer opinions, needs to be fact-based, as I may have a different set of values that will take the given facts into account).
I agree with your perspective about facts vs subjectivity. Even some facts as stated in a review aren't important to me because they're easily checked. Cargo space is an example. The only thing I care about is whether or not the vehicle can hold our stuff when we take off on one of our driving vacations. That's easily checked when we go to take the vehicle on a test drive.
However time from 0 to 60 MPH is something I'm usually interested in knowing. But I may be satisfied with a certain time when others are not - so it's still a matter of opinion.
The 0-60 thing is a good point, and excellent illustration for what I mean-
The Escape is much quicker, and if there were an area of the ratings for acceleration is graded, the Escape should be scored higher then the CR-V. The score isn't a matter of opinion, it's justnillustrating which is better in that category. Buyers viewing the ratings can decide which categories are most important to them (choosing a CR-V for more space even knowing that its acceleration is slower than the Escape, for example).
But the current chart makes it seem as if the Escape only has more power, with the CR-V being the better handling / steering vehicle. This is a direct contradiction to reality, and Edmunds' own comparison between the vehicles.
http://www.totalcarscore.com/?page=car-listing&TCS_MAKE_ID=&TCS_PARENT_MODEL_ID=- - &model_year=2013&TCS_SEGMENT_ID=8
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1209_2012_2013_compact_crossover_suv_co- mparison/viewall.html
I find the foreign branded cars that I have driven and owned (Nissan, Acura) be better buttoned down and better handlers. They have been fairly reliable but repairs are expensive.
The domestic brands I have driven/owned (Chevy Truck, Saturn Aura, Chevy Cobalt, Ford F-150, Windstar Van) and find them to be better riding and quiter than the comnpetiion. on a recent 300 mile round trip the wife's Aura with the 3.6L V-6 was a pleasure on the road. Quiet and smooth with plenty of power and 30+ MPG. I would rate it superior to her previous Maxima which had a less resilient ride, was slower to 60MPH was louder and required Premium fuel.
My cousin owns a 2010 Acura RDX t that I have ridden in and was unimpressed by the interior, found it loud and the Turbo 4Cl. unrefined.
My BIL has a 2006 Acura TL which I have driven. It is smooth, but the ride is
bouncy and it is loud on the highway.
I think it is a shame that many people would not even consider a domestic branded car even though that decision would be better for our economy than buying a foreign branded car. (Yes I realize probably well over half of
the the foreign branded vehicles are made/assembled in the USA). I would recommend that they at least consider it and take one for a test drive.....