1. Toyota Avalon XLS (2004) 2. Buick Park Avenue Ultra 3. Nissan Maxima 3.5SE 4. Ford Five Hundred FWD 5. Ford Five Hundred AWD 6. Chrysler 300C 7. Chrysler 300 Touring 8. Buick LaCrosse CXL 9. Kia Amanti 10. Lincoln Town Car Signature 11. Pontiac Bonneville SE 12. Buick LeSabre Limited 13. Mercury Grand Marquis LSE
All of those cars are Recommended, except for the Five Hundreds, the 300s, and the LeSabre, for which CR doesn't have reliability data, and the Bonneville, which had below-average reliability.
Ratings of the LaCrosse: Acceleration: 4/5 (9.0 seconds to 60) Transmission: 4/5 Routine Handling: 4/5 Emergency Handling: 3/5 Braking: 3/5 Headlights: 4/5 Ride: 4/5 Noise: 4/5 Driving Position: 4/5 Front Seat Comfort: 5/5 Rear Seat Comfort: 3/5 Access: 4/5 Controls and Displays: 4/5 Fit and Finish: 4/5 Trunk: 3/5 Fuel Economy: 2/5 (18 mpg)
quote: Originally posted by: thewizard16 "I don't like the Town Car, but why did they dislike it so much?"
They didn't hate it, they were just unimpressed with its handling, braking, and acceleration, and the fact that smaller cars had more interior room. All of the cars scored high enough to be Recommended, even the last-place Grand Marquis.
That's actually pretty high praise, coming from CR. Overall, the Lacrosse is a decent mid/large car for a decent price, but I expected better for the time they had (and knowing that the basic chassis wasn't going to change).
This also reinforces the way CR approaches vehicles as opposed to C & D or other car enthusiast magazines. CR rates vehicles just like they rate toasters, vacuum cleaners and life insurance policies. They very rarely consider appeal, and performance is much lower on their list, other than handling.
quote: Originally posted by: The Bartender "That's actually pretty high praise, coming from CR. Overall, the Lacrosse is a decent mid/large car for a decent price, but I expected better for the time they had (and knowing that the basic chassis wasn't going to change). This also reinforces the way CR approaches vehicles as opposed to C & D or other car enthusiast magazines. CR rates vehicles just like they rate toasters, vacuum cleaners and life insurance policies. They very rarely consider appeal, and performance is much lower on their list, other than handling."
What value is telling a consumer what they think of the "appeal" of a certain car? That's something that they, as shoppers, can only decide on their own.
quote: Originally posted by: ifcar " What value is telling a consumer what they think of the "appeal" of a certain car? That's something that they, as shoppers, can only decide on their own."
Exactly, that's why I've been ****ed that the Mustang beat the GTO by one point, only because they gave the Mustang a higher "fun to drive" by 6 points!!!!
__________________
____________________
DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND MY CONTROL, MY BRAIN IS CURRENTLY NOT FUNCTIONAL. MY EMPLOYER HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. AT THIS TIME, I HAVE NO WAY OF PREDICTING HOW LONG THIS ISSUE WILL TAKE TO CORRECT.
quote: Originally posted by: Kevin "Exactly, that's why I've been ****ed that the Mustang beat the GTO by one point, only because they gave the Mustang a higher "fun to drive" by 6 points!!!!"
That would be C/D, not CR. And fun-to-drive IS an important rating that can be judged by a reviewer; they took off those points from the GTO for its transmission, and rightfully so. People criticized the GTO for losing by one point thanks to a difference in the "Gotta Have It" rating, which is a more-questionable rating (I don't have a problem with it, but that's another thread).
quote: Originally posted by: ifcar " That would be C/D, not CR. And fun-to-drive IS an important rating that can be judged by a reviewer; they took off those points from the GTO for its transmission, and rightfully so. People criticized the GTO for losing by one point thanks to a difference in the "Gotta Have It" rating, which is a more-questionable rating (I don't have a problem with it, but that's another thread)."
I meant C/D and I meant "Gotta Have It" too, not "Fun to Drive". I have no problem with Fun to Drive, but they made a 6 point difference in gotta have it, when the GTO was funner and ranked higher in every subject thing (or tied). The Gotta Have It is basically what you were saying, it's the appeal to the consumers, not to the writers that matters.
__________________
____________________
DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND MY CONTROL, MY BRAIN IS CURRENTLY NOT FUNCTIONAL. MY EMPLOYER HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. AT THIS TIME, I HAVE NO WAY OF PREDICTING HOW LONG THIS ISSUE WILL TAKE TO CORRECT.
quote: Originally posted by: Kevin "I meant C/D and I meant "Gotta Have It" too, not "Fun to Drive". I have no problem with Fun to Drive, but they made a 6 point difference in gotta have it, when the GTO was funner and ranked higher in every subject thing (or tied). The Gotta Have It is basically what you were saying, it's the appeal to the consumers, not to the writers that matters."
No, the Gotta Have It is the editors' way of compensating for a serious flaw that doesn't change much anywhere else. The GTO had to lose points for its high price and lousy shift quality, and not enough could come from other categories to make it right.
quote: Originally posted by: Kevin "I meant C/D and I meant "Gotta Have It" too, not "Fun to Drive". I have no problem with Fun to Drive, but they made a 6 point difference in gotta have it, when the GTO was funner and ranked higher in every subject thing (or tied). The Gotta Have It is basically what you were saying, it's the appeal to the consumers, not to the writers that matters."
"funner"? Anyway, I agree that objective reviews should not try to determine what the "appeal" of the car is, as they ususally emphasize styling, which is the most subjective thing about a car. They also seem to consider sportiness (in handling) an importance, even if it comes at some sacrifice of ride comfort, which for many people, is more important.
quote: Originally posted by: ifcar " What value is telling a consumer what they think of the "appeal" of a certain car? That's something that they, as shoppers, can only decide on their own."
I didn't say that they SHOULD consider or comment on appeal, simply that they DON'T. Actually, they do bring the matter up at times, normally to point out when a vehicle's appeal is likely to cause dealers to stand firm on pricing or when it means that rebates will not be offered anytime soon.
I didn't say that they SHOULD consider or comment on appeal, simply that they DON'T. Actually, they do bring the matter up at times, normally to point out when a vehicle's appeal is likely to cause dealers to stand firm on pricing or when it means that rebates will not be offered anytime soon."
They'll bring it up when it's something that a consumer may need to know, but not any other time.