Consumer Reports Slams Infiniti..What???
#16
New last year, the Infiniti Q50 was the least reliable Japanese luxury car, with a much worse than average predicted-reliability score. Since the Q50 replaced the ultra-reliable G37 sports sedan, it helped diminish what used to be one of the most reliable brands to one of the least reliable among Japanese makes.
Posted on Yahoo 11-5-14
Posted on Yahoo 11-5-14
#17
Registered User
That organization doesn't know $hit about automobiles.
It's the same organization that will recommend you to buy a Chevrolet. I wouldn't touch that with YOUR ten-foot pole, let alone mine.
It's the same organization that will recommend you to buy a Chevrolet. I wouldn't touch that with YOUR ten-foot pole, let alone mine.
#18
Don't see what's so surprising here. Sure it might take a hit to your pride but the Q is such a fail of a vehicle. Inside and out its just done so horribly wrong with a plethora of problems to go along with it. Then again to each their own. Let's hope they bring back a model that'll make us grin as they did with the G.
The following users liked this post:
blnewt (11-09-2014)
#19
Registered User
#20
A quarter past stripped
Yeah, I always liked Infiniti for their more "performance minded" engineering. If I wanted TONS of gizmos and the "uber-plush" interior I would have bought a Lexus. I just don't understand why the CEO's of these companies don't READ THESE FORUMS before designing the cars.... A little quiet observation goes a long way IMO.
#21
Registered User
Yeah, I always liked Infiniti for their more "performance minded" engineering. If I wanted TONS of gizmos and the "uber-plush" interior I would have bought a Lexus. I just don't understand why the CEO's of these companies don't READ THESE FORUMS before designing the cars.... A little quiet observation goes a long way IMO.
(follow the money)
#22
Registered Member
iTrader: (1)
But the truth is that the vast majority of Infiniti owners never post in forums, so why would/should they care what a few percent of us owners think? I'm sure their target market focus group studies yield very different values than those of the typical member here.
(follow the money)
(follow the money)
The typical Infiniti shopper - in my mind of course - was value, then sport. Infiniti has clearly stepped away from those two tenants that made it special. They're now like Acura, the second Acura stopped building the Type-S sales nose dived. That particular car though a very small % of sales worked well as a brand ambassador. Infinitis' now pinning its hopes on the Eau Rouge - not a good idea IMHO
#23
Registered Member
Consumer reports should stick to reviewing vacum cleaners and cooking pots, that's what they are good at, they know very little about automotive industry. Car and Driver and Motortrend did their own reviews and they weren't nearly as bashful as consumer reports. That's is not to say that Q50 is without fault, it's got the same amount of issues as any brand new model without a predecessor.
With regard to Car and Driver, Motor Trend... they make most of their money from advertising and while i subscribe and enjoy both, i don't take their ratings seriously enough to base a buying decision on them. I use them as secondary info only. They always like the BMW's anyway.
I don't trust a magazine that accpets advertising dollars from the very same manufacturuer who's cars they "rate". It's the fox watching the hen house.
Consumer Reports accepts no advertising, they buy their own cars to test, and do so over an extended period of time. They are perhaps the bellweather authority on car ratings and reliability history.
Don't get taken in by the flashy articles and do your research outside that bubble.
The following users liked this post:
mummy2 (08-27-2023)
#24
Registered Member
iTrader: (3)
I completely disagree. Their ratings carry so much weight, manufacturers have been known to make changes based soley on their rating, tests and outcomes. They have been doing so for more than 20 years.
With regard to Car and Driver, Motor Trend... they make most of their money from advertising and while i subscribe and enjoy both, i don't take their ratings seriously enough to base a buying decision on them. I use them as secondary info only. They always like the BMW's anyway.
I don't trust a magazine that accpets advertising dollars from the very same manufacturuer who's cars they "rate". It's the fox watching the hen house.
Consumer Reports accepts no advertising, they buy their own cars to test, and do so over an extended period of time. They are perhaps the bellweather authority on car ratings and reliability history.
Don't get taken in by the flashy articles and do your research outside that bubble.
With regard to Car and Driver, Motor Trend... they make most of their money from advertising and while i subscribe and enjoy both, i don't take their ratings seriously enough to base a buying decision on them. I use them as secondary info only. They always like the BMW's anyway.
I don't trust a magazine that accpets advertising dollars from the very same manufacturuer who's cars they "rate". It's the fox watching the hen house.
Consumer Reports accepts no advertising, they buy their own cars to test, and do so over an extended period of time. They are perhaps the bellweather authority on car ratings and reliability history.
Don't get taken in by the flashy articles and do your research outside that bubble.
Remember though, CR wants to sell subscriptions, so they pick their tests mindful of what sells subscriptions and newsstand copies. Their reliability ratings--from subscribers--is also subject to sample bias.
#25
I completely disagree. Their ratings carry so much weight, manufacturers have been known to make changes based soley on their rating, tests and outcomes. They have been doing so for more than 20 years.
With regard to Car and Driver, Motor Trend... they make most of their money from advertising and while i subscribe and enjoy both, i don't take their ratings seriously enough to base a buying decision on them. I use them as secondary info only. They always like the BMW's anyway.
I don't trust a magazine that accpets advertising dollars from the very same manufacturuer who's cars they "rate". It's the fox watching the hen house.
Consumer Reports accepts no advertising, they buy their own cars to test, and do so over an extended period of time. They are perhaps the bellweather authority on car ratings and reliability history.
Don't get taken in by the flashy articles and do your research outside that bubble.
With regard to Car and Driver, Motor Trend... they make most of their money from advertising and while i subscribe and enjoy both, i don't take their ratings seriously enough to base a buying decision on them. I use them as secondary info only. They always like the BMW's anyway.
I don't trust a magazine that accpets advertising dollars from the very same manufacturuer who's cars they "rate". It's the fox watching the hen house.
Consumer Reports accepts no advertising, they buy their own cars to test, and do so over an extended period of time. They are perhaps the bellweather authority on car ratings and reliability history.
Don't get taken in by the flashy articles and do your research outside that bubble.
#26
Registered Member
Also what's the point of all those track tests when the subjective ratings always bias the track results to come up with their 'winner'. Winners in the C&D and MT ratings are never just about the track tests.
If I thought track tests were the quintesential test of a cars enjoyment, quality etc, based on those magazines, i should be driving a Subaru BRZ or a BMW 3 series.
Last edited by ToeKnee Sea; 11-10-2014 at 11:00 AM.
#27
Registered User
I tend to view reviews by the car mags, as well as those by CR, within their relevant context. If I wanted to get reliability, crash test, and economy data, I look to CR, but if I want to get performance data, it's going to come from a car mag. They are both valid resources.
If you look at a review of a corvette or a jeep wrangler in CR, you get info that makes it look like a POS and a horrible daily driver, but if you look into a car mag review of those when tested in their intended environment (i.e. track and off-road), they are fairly spectacular. Both sets of data are valid, just within the appropriate context.
.02
BTW, truth be told Tony, both the BRZ and 3 series ARE exquisite driving cars.
If you look at a review of a corvette or a jeep wrangler in CR, you get info that makes it look like a POS and a horrible daily driver, but if you look into a car mag review of those when tested in their intended environment (i.e. track and off-road), they are fairly spectacular. Both sets of data are valid, just within the appropriate context.
.02
BTW, truth be told Tony, both the BRZ and 3 series ARE exquisite driving cars.
#28
Registered Member
I tend to view reviews by the car mags, as well as those by CR, within their relevant context. If I wanted to get reliability, crash test, and economy data, I look to CR, but if I want to get performance data, it's going to come from a car mag. They are both valid resources.
If you look at a review of a corvette or a jeep wrangler in CR, you get info that makes it look like a POS and a horrible daily driver, but if you look into a car mag review of those when tested in their intended environment (i.e. track and off-road), they are fairly spectacular. Both sets of data are valid, just within the appropriate context.
.02
BTW, truth be told Tony, both the BRZ and 3 series ARE exquisite driving cars.
If you look at a review of a corvette or a jeep wrangler in CR, you get info that makes it look like a POS and a horrible daily driver, but if you look into a car mag review of those when tested in their intended environment (i.e. track and off-road), they are fairly spectacular. Both sets of data are valid, just within the appropriate context.
.02
BTW, truth be told Tony, both the BRZ and 3 series ARE exquisite driving cars.
#29
Registered Member
Thread Starter
CR reply
i think CR is very accurate in their reporting. i have subscribed for years, i find it useful & informative. i used the Used Car Pricing Guide when purchasing my G37 coupe 4 months ago. Definitely got a great deal & the report was kind of like "ammo". i don't think they cater to soccer moms, more like to the i want to be informed public.
G37 2012 premium, upgrade wheels & wood trim, LED everywhere, 30% Luminar, Tinted tails, Blue Stone.
G37 2012 premium, upgrade wheels & wood trim, LED everywhere, 30% Luminar, Tinted tails, Blue Stone.
The following users liked this post:
mummy2 (08-27-2023)
#30
The first-gen offered rock solid reliability because they were simple and essentially a re-branded Skyline V35, which had many of the bugs already ironed out. The only hits this model took were related to the Bose System and what was perceived as a harsh ride with the Sport Suspension (borrowed from the Z). Then the mid-cycle refresh came and the rev-up had some oil consumption issues, but everything else was solid. By 2009, there was little to complain about, and they just ironed out more bugs until 2013 where there are few to none.
The Q50 is a new model with lots of tech, so I think the bugs are expected right? They will have most of this ironed out in the 2015 next model.
The Q50 is a new model with lots of tech, so I think the bugs are expected right? They will have most of this ironed out in the 2015 next model.
Common sense is a Good sale of products leads to Better development, and better sales numbers...
it may, or maybe not that Infiniti brought up better numbers on the Q50 sales, but it's hard, and harder when competing against European rivals at least for 3-4 years to come.
I'm happy with my purchase G37.