Quote:
Originally Posted by smarticus
CR's bent data the way they wanted it to be for the past 30 to 40 years, why would they do an accurate report now?
|
Bent data?
1. CR reported that they got 39 mpg combined with a smart fortwo in their testing. EPA reported 36 mpg. None of the other cars that got 30 mpg or better on EPA got better than their EPA rating on CR's testing this year except the Yaris which got only 1 mpg better than its EPA rating. Most did worse on the CR testing. It was CR in 2007 that exposed the Honda Civic Hybrid as getting much worse fuel economy than its EPA rating.
2. CR reported gave the smart fortwo excellent ratings in reliability & in owner satisfaction.
That's 3 different sets of CR data that were favorable to the smart fortwo. They also rated it as exellent in owner cost & very good in crash protection. They didn't like it in their road test. Big deal. I did think they were heavy handed about it, but I'm hard pressed to find anything they said that isn't true.
The only thing I'd criticize them for is their comments about the transmission. They showed their ignorance of this innovation & a lack of skill in operating it. Not much different than someone who had never learned to drive a standard & then criticized it for bucking when they tried to drive a car with one. It's a learned skill; the CR test driver didn't learn how to use this automated manual before he drove the car. That's their bad.