Re: Consumer Reports

[Gross Scruggs <GScruggs@wposmtp.nps.navy.mil>]

Regarding Consumer Union testing ... be very careful what you accept from them. 
In the engineering and technology areas with which I am familar I have found CU
to be very good at, well, missing the point.   In fact the only purchases for
which I refer to CU are things like washing machines and fire retardant
sunglasses.  

Recall that in the early '70s in their sports car comparison their bottom line
comment about the Porsche 911 was, "...handles rather well but has insufficient
luggage space."  This shows that they haven't a clue about what automobile
handling means and that their point of view is suspect by even mentioning
luggage space and sports car in the same breath.  I'm truly surprised they don't
have some kind of test that runs cars off a cliff into a river and evaluates
their goodness on how long it takes them to sink!

Regardless of claims CU is not a true testing laboratory.  They have neither the
expertise nor the intent to do so.  I believe that SAE has a testing lab for
things automobile, as does that huge place in San Antonio called Southwestern
Testing Lab or something like that.  

Besides, how can one presume to test things which require taste to either
evaluate or appreciate?  Are you going to let someone else tell you what kind of
jelly, stereo, or guitar to buy?  CU has tested all of these things and has
arrived at a 'best buy.'  Did you buy your Quattro because CU said it was an
example of superb engineering, fun to drive and that you would just simply like
it?  

Now then, just because the village idiot says the sun is shining doesn't mean
that it is not.  CU may have the exact cut on some things, like washing machine
life and repair costs, but one must be very, very careful in which areas one
allows them to whisper in your ear.  And they do have something to sell ... that
magazine.

No flame, but a wisp of smoke.  Regards, Gross Scruggs