Consumer reports says the new Buick Regals exceed the quality of Honda and
Toyota now
ed/ontario

Only based on '03 reliability scores. I'm subscribed to consumer reports
car service and looking at all three right now. (Assume you mean vs. the
Accord and Camry). Buick Regal got a perfect score for reliability, but
black marks both for owner satisfaction and depreciation. Overall, the
Accord and Camry win hands down in Consumer Reports.


"xxxxxxxx" <carpediem@netrover.com> wrote in message
news:Gufsb.105568$PD3.5452818@nnrp1.uunet.ca...

Some basic exterior factors indicate either quality or 'bean
counter' designs. Honda is starting to let 'bean counters'
design more of the car. For example, look at the side of a V6
Accord.

A good designer first determines everything a side must do.
Then the artist sculptor adapts his design to those
requirements. 1970 and 1990 Hondas had side door guards. But
now an artist wants to make the V6 side look 'good'.
Therefore he created an ugly door that begs every other car to
smash in that panel. Its called dings or dents. Trophies to
the mental midget who designed a door without any protection.
Mental midgetry is something new in the Honda design
departments.

All acceptable cars use orange turn signals. Necessary and
essential to human safety. Those who know cars also know
that red rear turn signals cannot be seen in inclement
weather. Only anti-American cars such as Chevys kept using
red rear turn signals. But now those bean counter types have
gotten into Honda. The new Civic and Odessy don't use orange
turn signals. Bean counters can cut costs by making inferior
red turn signals that 1) cannot be seen in fog, snow white
out, or heavy rain, 2) are easily confused with brake lights,
and 3) make emergency flashers stop working when brake petal
is pressed.

Why would anyone in Honda do what crappy GM products do?
Why make the Honda inferior? Red rear turn signals are found
mostly on the worst cars on American roads. Notice that no
Toyota or Mercedes use red rear turn signals. Red rear turn
signals are forced upon designer by anti-innovation 'bean
counters'.

So yes, Honda quality should be decreasing as indicated by
the number of anti-innovation symptoms now appearing in
Hondas.

First the designer clearly defines what is necessary. Only
then does the artist form the design. Bean counters fear the
expense of orange rear turn signals, side door protection, and
anything that would be innovative. Notice how the engine
compartment has gotten higher - an indication that costs are
being cut by scrimping on engine compartment design. High
front end engine compartments are traditionally the symptom of
bean counter designing - more common in the low performance GM
products of the last 30 years. Now even Honda engine hoods
are higher - apparently because fewer car guys are now
designing the Hondas.

John wrote:

In article <Gufsb.105568$PD3.5452818@nnrp1.uunet.ca>, "xxxxxxxx"
<carpediem@netrover.com> wrote:

The problem with many companies that TEST vehicles such as Consumer
Reports and Car and Driver magazine is that they test only new cars. The
very best tests are long term test results. I feel certain that if they
compared a 2004 Buick Regal to a 2004 Toyota or Honda five years from
now--we all know that the Honda and Toyota would beat the Buick Regal.
American cars usually run really great for a couple of years and after
that--they start having all sorts of major problems. There are some
exceptions but I know from experience that it happens very often with many
cars made by American companies. A local mechanic said that he hates
Hondas and Toyotas since they rarely ever break down with major problems.
He said that he loves American cars since they keep him in business.

It does not matter how obvious those T-bird signals were in
clear weather. Approach any traffic signal in heavy fog. If
green or orange, it is seen with sufficient time. If red, not
observed until car is too close. Red does not cut through
fog, snow whiteout, or heavy rain. Orange does. Its simple
science.

Delays and other problems with same red bulb trying to be a
signal light AND a brake light AND an emergency flasher - all
demonstrate why red rear turn signals are only put on cars
designed by 'bean counters'. Now Honda is getting so MBA
oriented as to put red turn signals on 03 Civic and Odessy.
This is bad news to anyone who has been used to twenty five
years of superior designs from Honda. They all used orange
rear turn signals for good reason. It suggests the same bean
counters that created those terrible GM products and those
Henry Ford (pre-1981) products are now designing Hondas.

In the meantime, don't confuse how well your brain responds
to red with something completely different - how well red can
be seen by the human eye. Red is the worst color for
inclement weather. When are those signals most required? In
inclement weather. When the eye cannot detect red light.
Orange is what 'car guys' design into cars. Red is what 'bean
counters' demand to cut costs - human life be damned.

Red turn signals on Hondas and no side guard protection for
doors suggests that anti-innovators are now getting control of
Honda designs.

W Bittle wrote:

On 11/12/2003 4:33 PM Bill B. Johnson spake these words of knowledge:

Although it is true that Consumer Reports buys and tests cars, the
results reported above (leaving out significant details, I might add)
come from people who bought, own and drive the cars. You know - long
term test results.

Bear in mind that the results being collected and relayed by Consumer
Reports are comparative; the reliability and serviceability information
of the automobiles are gathered and reported so that the reader can
evaluate the experience of many owners at once, and compare that
collective experience to that of owners of other year models, and other
models of the same vintage.

I have 31,000 miles (not kilometers) on my 2003 Accord, purchased 27 Jan
of this year; while surely not average, it's also not terrifically
uncommon. I think that qualifies for 'long-term' in one sense of the
word, even though I've only had the car a little over 9 months.

RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
The closest I ever got to a 4.0 in high school was my blood alcohol content.

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:31:29 GMT, "John" <hutch@dontspamplease.com>
wrote:

This is rather perplexing to me. How can the owner satisfaction be
low when the reliability score is high? I know you're just reporting
what's on the magazine, so this question isn't directed to you, but
rather, am curious about the two different scores in areas which are
most seemingly related.

This part, I can believe or understand :-)

Uh, I had a 65 Thunderbird with the sequential red turn signals in the rear.
If you could miss that baby, you should not be on the road. But, seriously.
I always thought something like my 01 2 dr. Accord should have used that
full across the back light with a 3 bulb per side sequential turn signal
arrangement similar to the 65 - 71 Tbird. You just plain could not miss such
a big and active turn signal. And, being red, it did not blind you at night
like some of the real bright amber turn signals, many of which rival the
headlights. During the day, I actually find the amber signals harder to see
then the red ones. And to this day, when I see an old Tbird turning, it
stands out like an emergency vehicle.
With respect to trucks. I'm with you. There is nothing like being behind
the infamous "Blinky Light" ford F series pickup. They have a goofy brake
switch and a signal blinker that hesitates giving a situation where the
driver hits the brakes then hits the turn signal and the light on the side
he is signaling goes out for almost a full second before flashing. This
gives the impression he is actually turning the other way. I wish Ford would
fix this annoying and dangerous problem.

On 11/13/03 1:10 AM, in article kjb6rvoaao0jkocvao5tf6hnp0fdldohkr@4ax.com,
"Steve Lee" <hate@spam.com> wrote:

The owner satisfaction reflects the answers go questions along the lines of
"do you like the car?" & "knowing what you know now, would you buy another
one?". Maybe the engine is a dog. Maybe it is just boring to drive. Maybe
the dealer treated them like dirt when they came back for service. I don't
believe the categories are necessarily related. Just because a car is
reliable doesn't mean you have to like it.

Having received CR surveys, I can confirm this is true. They rate new cars,
and they survey owners of new and used cars. That's why when you look at the
time series ratings (e.g. 96-03) you usually see a decline in the ratings
each year. Problems with the late models emerge over time.

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:43:57 GMT, Dave Kelsen <kelsen@elmore.rr.com>
wrote:

I wouldn't call that long term. With as many miles as Americans drive,
and as high as the prices are on new cars, I personally expect well
over 100,000 miles without major (i.e. internal engine or tranny) work
on the car. I have 160,000 miles on my 1994 Civic, with only a timing
belt, 3 CV axles, a clutch master cylinder, a battery, a muffler, and
oil/antifreeze for maintenance costs. That is long term. My buddy has
a 1999 Accord Coupe 4-Cylinder, and he has 157k on his, with the same
maintenance history, except for no muffler, 2 CV axles and his was the
clutch slave. I would like to see American cars pull this off. I see
00 and 01 Neons and Stratuses all the time which look far older and
sound far worse. My wife's 99 Stratus is a piece of junk, with 2 fuel
pumps gone (to the tune of $1000 parts/labor), a battery, alignment
problems continuously ===> tires can't stay good, and suspension
issues, with only 80,000 miles. From working on aircraft for the
military, I can tell you that on those, the more you use an airplane,
the less work per hour of aircraft use you put into it. I see that in
the salesmen's cars as well. You see the driving salesmen put 200,000
miles on a car in 3 years with no maintenance except oil changes, but
try that across a 10 year period.

Nate