I will second that. I lost all faith in ConRep after receiving one of their
vehicle surveys (I was subscribing at the time) and despite having a couple
of serious problems with the vehicle in question, there was no clear
category in which to place the issues. Some of them had no place at all to
address them. Thus, a serious issue in one area may be diluted across a
couple of categories and, instead of drawing a poor mark, only show up as an
average mark.

Well, that coupled with a couple of specific instances where I made
appliance purchases based on their ratings and ended up with a sub-par
product that was a huge disappointment.

In addition, I read their "reviews" and "ratings" on items about which I had
a great deal of familiarity and found time and again that they missed the
mark by a large margin (especially in the areas of
high-tech/computer-related items).

--
KWW
The opinions expressed are my own and are based on personal experience.
Your experiences may vary, although I doubt it.

"nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
news:jh9sd2l6shno813rrd22deom39erca4ora@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:28:35 -0500, Christopher Wong
> <cwong@world.std.com> wrote:
>
>>J D Power 2006 vehicle dependability survey:
>>
>>http://www.jdpower.com/studies_jdpow...p?StudyID=1160
>>
>>It rates reliability over 3 years, meaning this rates 2003 model vehicles.
>>Industry average is 227 probs per 100. Hyundai is 253, well below average.
>>Hyundai has only one car in the top 3 rankings, in the subcompact
>>category.
>>That's because in 2003, there are ONLY 3 subcompacts on the market.
>>
>>So despite Hyundai's good showings of some models in the JD Power initial
>>quality surveys (2003 Sonata was 2nd in its class) and the Consumer
>>Reports
>>surveys, the company as a whole does lousy here. Why? Discuss.
>>
>>Chris
>
> If they don't tell what the problems are then one cannot judge the
> usefullness of the report. I have no faith in Consumer Reports
> because the criteria I have seen them use is often not relevant to my
> decision making. I expect JD Powers has the same problem - a fixation
> on numbers with little correlation between volume of complaints and
> the severity of the problems.

 

I will second that. I lost all faith in ConRep after receiving one of their
vehicle surveys (I was subscribing at the time) and despite having a couple
of serious problems with the vehicle in question, there was no clear
category in which to place the issues. Some of them had no place at all to
address them. Thus, a serious issue in one area may be diluted across a
couple of categories and, instead of drawing a poor mark, only show up as an
average mark.

Well, that coupled with a couple of specific instances where I made
appliance purchases based on their ratings and ended up with a sub-par
product that was a huge disappointment.

In addition, I read their "reviews" and "ratings" on items about which I had
a great deal of familiarity and found time and again that they missed the
mark by a large margin (especially in the areas of
high-tech/computer-related items).

--
KWW
The opinions expressed are my own and are based on personal experience.
Your experiences may vary, although I doubt it.

"nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
news:jh9sd2l6shno813rrd22deom39erca4ora@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:28:35 -0500, Christopher Wong
> <cwong@world.std.com> wrote:
>
>>J D Power 2006 vehicle dependability survey:
>>
>>http://www.jdpower.com/studies_jdpow...p?StudyID=1160
>>
>>It rates reliability over 3 years, meaning this rates 2003 model vehicles.
>>Industry average is 227 probs per 100. Hyundai is 253, well below average.
>>Hyundai has only one car in the top 3 rankings, in the subcompact
>>category.
>>That's because in 2003, there are ONLY 3 subcompacts on the market.
>>
>>So despite Hyundai's good showings of some models in the JD Power initial
>>quality surveys (2003 Sonata was 2nd in its class) and the Consumer
>>Reports
>>surveys, the company as a whole does lousy here. Why? Discuss.
>>
>>Chris
>
> If they don't tell what the problems are then one cannot judge the
> usefullness of the report. I have no faith in Consumer Reports
> because the criteria I have seen them use is often not relevant to my
> decision making. I expect JD Powers has the same problem - a fixation
> on numbers with little correlation between volume of complaints and
> the severity of the problems.

 

So, what kinds of problems did you have that would defy CR's categories?

Chris

On 2006-08-13, KWW <kwalker@nospamaircooled.net> wrote:
> I will second that. I lost all faith in ConRep after receiving one of their
> vehicle surveys (I was subscribing at the time) and despite having a couple
> of serious problems with the vehicle in question, there was no clear
> category in which to place the issues. Some of them had no place at all to
> address them. Thus, a serious issue in one area may be diluted across a
> couple of categories and, instead of drawing a poor mark, only show up as an
> average mark.

 

So, what kinds of problems did you have that would defy CR's categories?

Chris

On 2006-08-13, KWW <kwalker@nospamaircooled.net> wrote:
> I will second that. I lost all faith in ConRep after receiving one of their
> vehicle surveys (I was subscribing at the time) and despite having a couple
> of serious problems with the vehicle in question, there was no clear
> category in which to place the issues. Some of them had no place at all to
> address them. Thus, a serious issue in one area may be diluted across a
> couple of categories and, instead of drawing a poor mark, only show up as an
> average mark.

 

To be precise I would have to dig back in my records (it was a number of
years ago now), but I distinctly recall 3 separate types of issues, I
believe one was a cooling issue which involved electrical components in the
cooling system (maybe fan). Basically, the survey categories were not
a) Complete
b) Orthogonal
It was quite frustrating and eyeopening at the same time.
--
KWW

"Christopher Wong" <cwong@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:tKSdnaZNzO1Dt3zZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@rcn.net...
> So, what kinds of problems did you have that would defy CR's categories?
>
> Chris
>
> On 2006-08-13, KWW <kwalker@nospamaircooled.net> wrote:
>> I will second that. I lost all faith in ConRep after receiving one of
>> their
>> vehicle surveys (I was subscribing at the time) and despite having a
>> couple
>> of serious problems with the vehicle in question, there was no clear
>> category in which to place the issues. Some of them had no place at all
>> to
>> address them. Thus, a serious issue in one area may be diluted across a
>> couple of categories and, instead of drawing a poor mark, only show up as
>> an
>> average mark.
>

 

To be precise I would have to dig back in my records (it was a number of
years ago now), but I distinctly recall 3 separate types of issues, I
believe one was a cooling issue which involved electrical components in the
cooling system (maybe fan). Basically, the survey categories were not
a) Complete
b) Orthogonal
It was quite frustrating and eyeopening at the same time.
--
KWW

"Christopher Wong" <cwong@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:tKSdnaZNzO1Dt3zZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@rcn.net...
> So, what kinds of problems did you have that would defy CR's categories?
>
> Chris
>
> On 2006-08-13, KWW <kwalker@nospamaircooled.net> wrote:
>> I will second that. I lost all faith in ConRep after receiving one of
>> their
>> vehicle surveys (I was subscribing at the time) and despite having a
>> couple
>> of serious problems with the vehicle in question, there was no clear
>> category in which to place the issues. Some of them had no place at all
>> to
>> address them. Thus, a serious issue in one area may be diluted across a
>> couple of categories and, instead of drawing a poor mark, only show up as
>> an
>> average mark.
>