Chrysler: Minivan Comaprison

Lloyd Parker wrote:
 


Common myth, not particularly close to the truth. Sorta like "The PT
Cruiser is built on a Neon chassis." Not to mention that the
first-generation Chrysler minivans were truly "mini." The Oddyssey and
Sienna wiegh more than many SUVs, as do the modern Chrysler vans.
They've gotten HUGE. They weigh more than my '66 Dodge Polara.
 

Not by all the people who've blown transmissions out of them.

Joseph Oberlander wrote: 

I agree, I've noticed the bias for years. It seems to mainly affect
cars, I don't notice it with appliances, etc. Just have to factor it in
with the other information that is more useful and accurate (stats, etc.
on the cars).


Matt

Lloyd Parker wrote: 

Beats me, but they are biased and not even consisten with their own data
as another poster illustrated. Could be the head of the auto test
department had a lemon Chrysler in the 70s and hasn't got over it yet.
Who knows...

 

You are confusing having the appearance of bias or having a reason to be
biased with actually being biased. People are prejudiced with no good
reason, and people with a reason to be prejudiced often aren't.


Matt

Steve wrote: 

I think part of the problem is the CR only attempts to capture
reliability, not durability. There is a subtle, but important
disctinction between the two. I haven't returned one of their annual
surveys in years because they were so biased I felt it wasn't worth my
time. Also, last one I did only covered cars up to 5 years old. My 84
Accord didn't begin to self-destruct until after the 5th year and thus I
had no means to report that to CR. My Acclaim was bullet proof for
nearly 10 years and I likewise had no means to report that. They may
collect data over a longer time period now, but I don't know as I file
13 the survey each year and have done so for several years now.


Matt

Steve wrote: 

It has also been a fairly heavily recalled vehicle. I just recently saw
another Odyssey recall...


Matt

"Lloyd Parker" <edu> wrote in message
news:bm10uh$n9s$cc.emory.edu... 

Well, quite obviously if they aren't recording long term reliability they
are
certainly biased.

What is the point of comparing reliability on 1-5 year old vehicles? These
days
the vehicles in that age range are are going to be covered by factory
warranty.
Thus any problems will be taken care of for free, by the manufacturer.

What is much more important is the reliability of the vehicles AFTER the
manufacturers warranty has expired, and the vehicle owner is on his own
for repair expenses.

And on top of that I can't help but believe that CR is going to be a much
more popular magazine among the folks who have to make every dollar
count, which is more a polite way of saying people who can't afford to buy
a new car every 5 years. Thus I can't help but believe that the majority of
CR readers are people who are going to be buying those cars in the 5-10
year old age bracket. I mean, can you really imagine the high-powered exec
making 150K a year and buying a new car every year having the time to
pay attention to what CR says?

The CR auto test ratings seems to me more of a device created by CR to
generate squawking and controversial articles that are eye-catchers and
that serve to generate yapping and talk in various forums (like this one)
in order to simply repeatedly advertise the name of CR, rather than to
produce actual data that their readers could actually use. I suppose that
for the highly paid CR auto test people who cars are but mere playthings,
it's not really fun to be reviewing 5 year old vehicles, so that is why they
don't do it. And since foreign vehicles sell less in a per-class basis than
domestics, you get more controversy and thus advertising by dissing the
largest groups - ie: domestics. I would imagine that if imports ever do
become the majority in most classes that CR will turn tables and start
dissing imports in order to keep the bullshit generator in operation.

Ted

In article <org>,
"Matthew S. Whiting" <org> wrote: 
And of course, Chrysler's minivans have never been recalled.

In article <newscache$taehmh$g6a1$ipinc.net>,
"Ted Mittelstaedt" <placo.com> wrote: 

I see. In Bizzaro world, "biased" means not reporting what you want them to
report.
 

Which still means lots of inconvenience, alternate transportation, etc.
 

Yes, I can easily do so. Perhaps that's why so many execs buy Lexuses.
 

Really? Want to compare Accord sales to Intrepid, Taurus, or Impala? Civic
to Neon or Cavalier?

 
Yeah, they just dis cars at random, without any data, without any owner
reports, just to spite you.

Geez, you anti-CR folks are so incredibly DUMB! Most of you never even read
the magazine (note all the people posting about the reliability data that show
they have no idea what it means).