More on Consumer Reports ratings

[tr7driver]

I picked up the new issue of Consumer Reports. They have changed how they display their reliability ratings. They display more years of ratings, but they no longer list the individual problem areas. You need to go to the website to see that. So, I went to the website and looked at their “reliability history” for the Ford Fusion Hybrid. I'd like to post a screen shot, but I’m sure that would violate copyright restrictions and have this post removed. So, here is a crude reproduction from their website:

 

Instead of their symbols, I’ll use the following to demonstrate based on their 5 choice scale:

Top (best) rating = +++++

Next to best = ++++

Middle (average) = +++

Below average = ++

Worse (lowest) = +

2010 2011 2012 2013

+++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ Engine Major

+++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ Engine cooling

+++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ Transmission Major

+++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ Transmission Minor

+++++ +++++ +++++ ++++ Drive System

+++ +++++ +++++ +++++ Fuel system

+++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ Engine Minor

++++ +++ ++++ +++++ Electrical System

New Car Prediction: Worse than average

 

So, it would appear to me, that for some reason they discount all of their reader survey data and give the car a poor new car reliability prediction. No fusion hybrid model year has any below average rating, or even two areas that are average in reader ratings.

[tr7driver]

Consumer Reports “report card” on the SE Hybrid 4-cyl CVT Fusion

 

Instead of their symbols, I’ll use the following to demonstrate:

Top (best) rating = +++++

Next to best = ++++

Middle (average) = +++

Below average = ++

Worse (lowest) = +

------

Predicted Reliability: ++

Owner Satisfaction: ++++

Owner Costs: +++++

Accident Avoidance: ++++

Fuel Economy: +++++

Acceleration: ++++

Ride: ++++

Front seat comfort: +++

 

We all know the crash test ratings are also pretty good.

[timf]

"We hate Fords. Why? Because we do. We don't care if consumers have had good experiences with them. MyFord Touch ruins the whole experience. It was buggy and crashed a lot 3 years ago when it first came out so it must still suck. Maybe if Ford moved their headquarters to Japan we'd like them more."

[hybridbear]

That's so strange that it scores well yet they predict it will have poor reliability. I wonder what they would say if you contacted them to ask about that.

[acdii]

I give not much credence to CR based on that information. I thought the 2010 FFH I had was most reliable. I had only one issue with it, thanks to a spider who made a home in a MAP sensor. Aside from a squeaky wiper bushing, the 13 has been very reliable the past 18800 miles.

[Texasota]

This seems very strange to me also. I have not been able to read the April issue yet but I would guess they are projecting poor long term reliability based on the problems associated with Ford's latest models in general (e.g. MFT, Powershift transmissions and Ecoboost engines). If this speculation is correct, then it may be legitimate for the gas/turbo Fusions but it does not seem legitimate to apply that to the FFH since the Powershift transmissions and Ecoboost engines are not applicable to the FFH.

 

The issues with MFT do apply to the FFH but I don't agree with berating the entire car because of a particular piece of optional equipment. But, I can also understand that it would become an unwieldy mess in the ratings to exclude/account for optional equipment on an individual basis.

[djminfll]

CR loves to swoon over the Japanese cars and bash American cars. The only "trouble spot" for the FFH is the Audio system - I'm assuming that is MFT - and as a result it scores "WORSE THAN AVERAGE?" Are they kidding? The side bar says "Based on the latest survey, we expect reliability of new models will be 24% below average." They have consistently raved about Toyota and Honda, and bashed most American cars and German cars, even though JD Power New Car ratings put them at the top.

[Texasota]

CR loves to swoon over the Japanese cars and bash American cars. They have consistently raved about Toyota and Honda, and bashed most American cars and German cars, even though JD Power New Car ratings put them at the top.

It was only a couple of years ago that CR raved about the first generation FFHs and they also raved about Ford having achieved world class reliability.

[Waldo]

CR loves to swoon over the Japanese cars and bash American cars.

 

I would argue that it's the American consumer that swoons over Japanese cars and bash American cars. That bias is then reflected in the survey data since it's the same American consumer's that fill out the survey.

[acdii]

Then again how many actual owners filled out the survey and how many dont own a fusion but bash it.

[Texasota]

Then again how many actual owners filled out the survey and how many dont own a fusion but bash it.

 

From CR:

 

 

Reliability history

These charts are based on 1.1 million responses to our 2013 Annual Auto Survey. Consumer Reports subscribers reported on any serious problems they had with their vehicles during the past 12 months that they considered serious because of cost, failure, safety, or downtime, in any of the trouble spots included in the table below.

 

Below is the page where I found this which describes their testing (a good read IMO). The surveys I have received and returned have you report on cars that you own. It does not allow you to submit comments about any car in general. Is there fraud as you are suggesting? I suppose it is possible but I think it is unlikely.

 

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/04/a-guide-to-new-car-ratings-and-reviews/index.htm

 

As stated before I own Fords and have been buying them since 1978. I like Fords and Ford earned tremendous good will from me when they refused the recent government bailouts. But I also try to be objective and fair minded when evaluating them. I have had good experiences and bad. My 2012 Ford Focus's transmission has been a disaster and would have provoked many people to abandon Ford permanently.

 

Likewise, I subscribe to CR and I respect it. While I don't always like or agree with everything they have to say about my Fords I think they mostly have it right. If I had listened to their advice ( #1: don't buy new model first year and #2: the Focus's Powershift transmission is flawed) I would have avoided this unpleasant ownership experience. Acdii, you had a bad experience with the BD that you replaced it after a very short ownership experience. That experience would have likely provoked many people to abandon Ford permanently.

 

I enjoy this forum, I learn a lot here and I will be a better informed buyer when I purchase a FFH because of this forum. But, after participating here for the last several months it became very clear to me that there is a strong element of "don't criticize or say anything bad about the FFH or Ford in general" here. As an example, there was a new member a few months back that posted a long list of grievances and complaints about his new FFH. Some were of the nit-picky vain but many were valid grievances. But one of the forum responses to him asked if he had difficulty getting along with his wife. I think the guy left and never returned.

 

We should be willing to admit/discuss that Ford has made some whopper mistakes the last couple of years in rolling out MFT, Powershift transmissions, and the Ecobost engines. I don't believe individuals, various trade rags and other entities like CR that point these flaws out are Ford haters. I want to hear and read what they have to say even if it is unpleasant. Open honest debate is good.

 

Where am I going wrong here?

Edited March 7, 2014 by Texasota

[hermans]

Ya, they sure had made some whopper mistakes....I once owned a Pinto SW.

[acdii]

Since they appear to have grouped the Hybrid in with the non hybrid, its misinformation, and a dont buy this hurts the perfectly fine line of the FFH. Yes a few of the early models were flawed, but if you look at the majority of posts, by Job2 they had ironed out a lot of the problems of the FFH, and it is a very good car.

 

IOW, if it was such a bad car to say what they say, you would think this site would be flooded with people having problems, and other than a select few, me included with the first one, the majority of the people have been trouble free, especially after the update and learning curve was over. There are always growing pains with first model year cars, and Ford worked quickly to address some issues, like the driveshaft clunk, and MFT. The way CR rated them is unfair to the FFH. It will push prospective buyers who are leery of Ford to start with away from a really nice car.

[Waldo]

the majority of the people have been trouble free,

 

Don't confuse this statement with "below average reliability". On all cars from all manufacturers the majority are trouble free. It only takes a very small amount of "unreliability" to put a car behind it's competitors, just because the overall number of issues is so small. This is where I think Consumer's Reports stretches things a bit. Notice how they never call anything "unreliable", they use "below average". They manage their data as a comparison rather than as an absolute, thus it's pretty easy for them to draw a line and say the vehicles in the bottom half of the list are "below average" in reliability, when in fact they are perfectly reliable vehicles, just a very little bit less reliable than other competitors.

[Ted Swing]

This is my first Ford (and my parents never owned one in my lifetime) so I don't have any history of brand loyalty to them. I picked the FFH after several months of research and so far my experience has borne out that research. It sounds like some Ford models (like your Focus) have had issues lately and that's fair game for Consumer Reports to criticize that.

 

I don't know if I speak for others, but I think the objection that some of us have to Consumer Reports' criticism is that both our own experiences with the FFH and their own numbers (reported by tr7driver in the original post) seem to suggest that the FFH is a good car, yet they come out with an overall conclusion that seems to suggest it is not. If this is the result of combining reliable vehicles (FFH) with unreliable vehicles (FF Ecoboost), then I just wonder how useful such combined data are. Nobody buys or owns a brand of car - they buy a specific model. If it's based on MFT, that's probably unfairly punitive.

 

This type of feedback probably works for motivating Ford to step up their game on those cars and features that are bringing their brand/model reliability down, but I don't think it's the right way to present the data for an individual consumer making a car buying decision.

 

I would hope that we could be helpful to people coming here, even frustrated owners, and we generally are. Some of what you're seeing may be a reaction with what we see as exaggerated or misleading criticisms. So much of the press surrounding cars seems to based on perceptions only loosely related to reality.

[tr7driver]

Just to be clear. The data I posted from their website specifies this rating for the SE Hybrid 4-cyl CVT Fusion.

 

They post different ratings for the 4 cyl Titanium (It is recommended and they gave every trouble spot top ratings) and the SE 4 Cyl (where they post the trouble spot data for all areas as N/A).

 

They gave the 4 cyl Titanium an overall score of 78 while giving the hybrid an overall score of 85 and the SE 4 cyl 82 (out of 100).

 

I have been a CU subscriber since the late 1970's, and I usually take their word and guidance into consideration. Overall, I fell it has helped me. Unfortunately that led me to buy a 03 Honda Accord V6 with transmission problems and a 02 CRV with A/C compressor issues that are well documented on the Honda forums. CU only now happens to mention these issues.

 

I not saying they are bashing Ford, I just saying I don't get it. I'm not sure the folks that did the write-up for the recent magazine were aware of the ratings information they post on their website.

 

I begin to take it personally as this will somewhat diminish the value of my car in trade appeal and cash price.

[acdii]

This is my first Ford (and my parents never owned one in my lifetime) so I don't have any history of brand loyalty to them. I picked the FFH after several months of research and so far my experience has borne out that research. It sounds like some Ford models (like your Focus) have had issues lately and that's fair game for Consumer Reports to criticize that.

 

I don't know if I speak for others, but I think the objection that some of us have to Consumer Reports' criticism is that both our own experiences with the FFH and their own numbers (reported by tr7driver in the original post) seem to suggest that the FFH is a good car, yet they come out with an overall conclusion that seems to suggest it is not. If this is the result of combining reliable vehicles (FFH) with unreliable vehicles (FF Ecoboost), then I just wonder how useful such combined data are. Nobody buys or owns a brand of car - they buy a specific model. If it's based on MFT, that's probably unfairly punitive.

 

This type of feedback probably works for motivating Ford to step up their game on those cars and features that are bringing their brand/model reliability down, but I don't think it's the right way to present the data for an individual consumer making a car buying decision.

 

I would hope that we could be helpful to people coming here, even frustrated owners, and we generally are. Some of what you're seeing may be a reaction with what we see as exaggerated or misleading criticisms. So much of the press surrounding cars seems to based on perceptions only loosely related to reality.

 

 

Just to be clear. The data I posted from their website specifies this rating for the SE Hybrid 4-cyl CVT Fusion.

 

They post different ratings for the 4 cyl Titanium (It is recommended and they gave every trouble spot top ratings) and the SE 4 Cyl (where they post the trouble spot data for all areas as N/A).

 

They gave the 4 cyl Titanium an overall score of 78 while giving the hybrid an overall score of 85 and the SE 4 cyl 82 (out of 100).

 

I have been a CU subscriber since the late 1970's, and I usually take their word and guidance into consideration. Overall, I fell it has helped me. Unfortunately that led me to buy a 03 Honda Accord V6 with transmission problems and a 02 CRV with A/C compressor issues that are well documented on the Honda forums. CU only now happens to mention these issues.

 

I not saying they are bashing Ford, I just saying I don't get it. I'm not sure the folks that did the write-up for the recent magazine were aware of the ratings information they post on their website.

 

I begin to take it personally as this will somewhat diminish the value of my car in trade appeal and cash price.

Well Said from both. This is also how I feel.

[Sleddog]

I've had some bad Fords. Everything from a 72 Mustang Mach 1 that was a lemon to an 86 Escort that spent more time in the shop then it did on the road. My trucks have always been Fords. I had been away from Ford cars until I got my 2001 Focus. 361,318 miles later I traded in for another Focus. The only issues I had with that Focus were a speedo sensor at 150,000, a fuel pump at 225,000 and a bad right front drive shaft bearing at 250,000.

 

It's possible to get a vehicle of any make that has issues. It's what the manufacture does about those issues that counts.

 

My experience with Ford trucks and my Foci did play into my FFH purchase. CR can say what they want. I'm happy with what I purchased. Besides, I would say those that do their research, including looking at CR and other sources, will make an informed decision. Others will hear one thing and classify that vehicle that way until the cows come home. Here's an example. My father-in-law harps on hybrids. "You're going to have to replace that battery in 50,000 miles and it's gonna cost you 10,000!." To be quite frank, he doesn't know how a hybrid works any more than he know how a HD flat screen does. About all he knows is "something he heard". And that something was from a source that doesn't know anything about hybrids, battery technology or Ford's warranty. It was 4 months before he found out we purchased a FFH. He asked why I didn't tell him. My response was "I didn't want to hear you spout your misinformation about a subject you know nothing about." He hasn't said anything one way or the other about our FFH. Opinions are like rectums, everyone has one. But some have a larger size differential then others.

 

My sister has a 2014 Honda Accord, a CR top 10 car. She's had it for 2 months and it's been in the shop 7 times. She's had issues with fit and finish, engine, transmission and the dash display. Not bad for a CR top 10 pick.

Edited March 8, 2014 by Sleddog

[Texasota]

 

Don't confuse this statement with "below average reliability". On all cars from all manufacturers the majority are trouble free. It only takes a very small amount of "unreliability" to put a car behind it's competitors, just because the overall number of issues is so small. This is where I think Consumer's Reports stretches things a bit. Notice how they never call anything "unreliable", they use "below average". They manage their data as a comparison rather than as an absolute, thus it's pretty easy for them to draw a line and say the vehicles in the bottom half of the list are "below average" in reliability, when in fact they are perfectly reliable vehicles, just a very little bit less reliable than other competitors.

I think this is a very good analysis. The reliability of cars today is very good compared to 10 - 20 years ago. The lower rated cars of today are probably significantly better than the best cars of 20 years ago. The bar keeps rising as a result of the brutal competition in this industry and the consumer benefits greatly from this. Since the bar does keep rising it would be impossible and not meaningful for CR to attempt an absolute data comparison. It is the relative comparison between similar models that is meaningful and useful.

[Texasota]

Ya, they sure had made some whopper mistakes....I once owned a Pinto SW.

In 1978 I purchased my first car - a 1975 bright orange Pinto station wagon. The only thing I can say good about it was that is was better than a Chevy Vega.

[acdii]

boo

 

I had a 1972 Vega Coupe, good little car for what it was(once the block was sleeved).

[hermans]

In 1978 I purchased my first car - a 1975 bright orange Pinto station wagon. The only thing I can say good about it was that is was better than a Chevy Vega.

I also had a Vega SW. It wasn't a bad little car. In 1979 I traded it in on a Lincoln and got $500 less than I paid for it - not a bad deal at all. I also had a 1993 Escort SW and the engine did an atomic bomb in the middle of the Mohave Desert with 328 miles on it. Turns out the dealer didn't check the oil when they did the delivery. That when I learned to check the oil before taking delivery on a new car.

[hermans]

boo

 

I had a 1972 Vega Coupe, good little car for what it was(once the block was sleeved).

I had a friend that owned a repair shop who used to put small block Chevy motors in Vegas. I drove one for about a year, when I could pry it out of my wife's hands. What a blast to drive. The only clues were the car was raised slightly, bigger tires, dual exhausts out the back and of course the rumble at idle.

Edited March 8, 2014 by hermans

[acdii]

I had a friend that owned a repair shop who used to put small block Chevy motors in Vegas. I drove one for about a year, when I could pry it out of my wife's hands. What a blast to drive. The only clues were the car was raised slightly, bigger tires, dual exhausts out the back and of course the rumble at idle.

Not to veer too much off topic...

 

Too Late :)

 

One afternoon when I was 19, my friend and I was sitting in a sammich shop at Fullerton and Pulaski, just doing what teens do, talk about cars, and this Vega pulls up to the light, it was rumblin, we knew they dropped a small block in it, and a Toyota pulled up next to it. It revved, the Vega revved. THe light turned green, the Toyota leaped away from the light while the Vega roared, then the back window blew out, and the car went no where. When they built the car, they didn't bother to add frame rails to handle the torque of the V8 and twisted the car when they launched. We were on the FLOOR laughing so hard we had tears in our eyes. The shop owner was wondering what we were laughing so hard about, and all we could do was point out the window, he took one look and bust out laughing too.

 

Here's the most ironic part, the shop owner used to be a dragster racer, racing top fuel rails. He knew instantly what had happened without even have to ask.

Edited March 8, 2014 by acdii

[B25Nut]

I had the Pontiac version of the Vega, a '79 Astra. Bought it for $795 with 25K miles on it. I got another 30K miles out of it. That worked out to less than 3 cents a mile, so I had few complaints. It barely made it up the Cuesta Grade in our move to the Central Coast.