Consumer Report Top Picks.

[Mitch]

Top Picks 2007
The best models in 10 categories


Five new models join our Top Picks this year. Among small SUVs, the redesigned Toyota RAV4 now tops our Ratings. The updated Infiniti G35 beat all other upscale sedans. A new engine propelled the Toyota Sienna to the top of our minivan Ratings. The redesigned Mazda MX-5 Miata impressed us enough to earn the nod in the Fun to Drive category. And the new Honda Fit is our pick in a new category for small, fuel-efficient budget cars. Our Top Picks are recommended vehicles that have met our stringent requirements in three key areas:
Testing: Of the more than 250 vehicles we’ve recently tested, each Top Pick has scored at or near the top of its category.
Reliability: Each has proven average or better in reliability, which is based on more than 1.3 million responses to our Annual Car Reliability Survey.
Safety: Top Picks also performed at least adequately in overall crash protection if tested by the government or the insurance industry. The report card accompanying each Top Pick shows how the vehicle fared in those areas. Based on those multifaceted criteria, we’ve judged these vehicles to be the most well-rounded packages in their categories. To see how other models compare, consult the Vehicle Ratings charts, (available to subscribers).


Fun to drive - Mazda MX-5 Miata
Small SUV - Toyota RAV4
Small sedan - Honda Civic
Family sedan - Honda Accord
Minivan - Toyota Sienna
Luxury sedan - Infiniti M35
Midsized SUV - Toyota Highlander Hybrid
Budget cars - Honda Fit
Green car - Toyota Prius
Upscale sedan - Infiniti G35

Fun to drive Mazda MX-5 Miata
The Miata ($21,000 to $27,000) won drivers over with its balanced handling, quick and precise steering, and crispshifting six-speed manual transmission--all available at a reasonable price. The manual top can be lowered and raised with one hand from the driver’s seat, making open motoring a snap. An optional power folding hard top was introduced for 2007. If you want a fun-to-drive car with the functionality of a four-door sedan or wagon, consider the Subaru Impreza WRX.

Small SUV Toyota RAV4
The RAV4’s 2006 redesign is a significant improvement over its predecessor, and the V6 version is the only nonhybrid SUV to earn an excellent rating in our testing. Larger than the outgoing model, the RAV4 ($23,000 to $27,000) has an interior that is versatile, comfortable, and now spacious enough for an optional but small third-row seat. Its 3.5- liter V6 is smooth and powerful, and returns good fuel economy that’s only 1 mpg less than the standard four-cylinder. Handling is agile and the ride is comfortable. The newly redesigned Honda CR-V is a good runner-up.

Small sedan Honda Civic
The Civic ($17,000 to $23,000) was redesigned for 2006. With a relatively roomy interior, comfortable ride, smooth powertrain, and good handling, the Civic is enjoyable to drive. It also gets kudos for excellent reliability, impressive crash-test results, and good fuel economy. Models with manual and automatic transmissions returned 31 and 28 mpg overall, respectively, in our testing, and the Hybrid got 37 mpg.

Family sedan Honda Accord
The Accord ($20,000 to $33,000) provides an excellent balance of comfort, roominess, ride, and handling. Like the Civic, it delivers very good fuel economy for its class; four-cylinder and V6 engines got 24 and 23 mpg overall in our testing, and the hybrid model got 25 mpg. Also worth considering: the Toyota Camry and Volkswagen Passat 3.6.

Minivan Toyota Sienna
For years, the Sienna and Honda Odyssey have swapped spots as CR’s top-rated minivan. For 2007, the Sienna ($26,000 to $38,000) received a new powerful and efficient 3.5-liter V6 engine that now gives it the edge in our testing. Both minivans have spacious and refined interiors on par with some luxury sedans. The Sienna is quieter and is offered with all-wheel drive, while the Odyssey ($26,000 to $37,000) has more agile handling and is--dare we say--fun to drive for a minivan.

Luxury sedan Infiniti M35
With an excellent combination of luxury and performance, the outstanding M35 ($42,000 to $45,000) earned the highest score of any current sedan in our testing. Well equipped and comfortable, it’s just as capable on a twisty two-lane road as it is cruising down the highway. Available with either rear- or all-wheel drive, the M also comes as a V8-powered M45 model for about $55,000. Also worth a look: the BMW 530i and Audi A6.

Midsized SUV Toyota Highlander Hybrid
The gas/electric Highlander Hybrid ($35,000 to $40,000) is an excellent overall package. It includes all the inviting attributes of the conventional Highlander plus better acceleration and moderately better fuel economy: 22 mpg. It’s one of only three SUVs that have achieved an excellent overall score in our testing. The well-rounded Highlander provides a comfortable, quiet ride, excellent fit and finish, and an available but small third row. If you need a roomier third-row seat, consider the Honda Pilot.

Budget cars Honda Fit
Smaller than the Civic, the budget-priced Fit ($14,000 to $16,000) is the best overall in a new class of fuel-efficient subcompact cars. Not only is it fun to drive, but its compact dimensions pack an impressive amount of interior room and versatility. The rear seats can be folded flat or the cushions folded up against the backrest to create a tall floor-toceiling space that can accommodate bulky items. Overall fuel economy is an excellent 32 and 34 mpg with the automatic and manual transmissions, respectively. Antilock brakes and curtain air bags are standard, a rarity in this class.

Green car Toyota Prius
The fuel-stingy, gas/electric Prius hybrid ($23,000) provides reasonable performance in addition to excellent fuel economy. Its 44 mpg overall is the best we’ve measured in any five-passenger vehicle. The interior is roomy enough to make it a viable alternative to a family sedan. A good alternative is the 37-mpg Honda Civic Hybrid.

Upscale sedan Infiniti G35
The updated G35 ($35,000 to $39,000) successfully blends sportiness and luxury. Available in rear- or all-wheel drive, it has an exuberant powertrain, agile handling, and a reasonably comfortable ride. The interior is nicely finished with much improved ergonomics. For an alternative that’s very comfortable and refined, but not sporty, consider the Lexus ES350.

[Mitch]

Which companies make the best cars?
Global fight with intriguing results


Last year was a tough time to sell American cars. Ford lost $6.1 billion in North America in 2006. Chrysler built thousands of vehicles that even some of its own dealers didn’t want. And the percentage of car buyers who bought American nameplates continued to fall, to 54 percent from 66 percent in 2000.

At the same time, sales of cars from Japan and Korea rose sharply. With both Ford and General Motors slumping, 2007 could be the year that foreign carmakers sell more cars in the U.S. than Detroit does.

To shed light on why some automakers are thriving while others are spinning their wheels, Consumer Reports dug deep into its own data to show the highs and lows for major carmakers. We analyzed how vehicles performed in a battery of CR’s road tests, coupled with reliability histories based on more than 1.3 million vehicles, representing 250 models. We huddled with CR’s team of expert auto engineers and interviewed business analysts who follow the industry closely.

Here’s what we found:
No carmaker does everything right. Volkswagen builds vehicles that perform very well in our testing but vary in reliability. Despite very good reliability, not all Toyota models score well.
Just because a car is Japanese doesn’t mean it’s a great car. Honda,Toyota, and Subaru make consistently reliable cars, but other Japanese automakers have mixed results.
U.S. automakers build some good models. But many vehicles are mediocre, and even the best seldom rise to the top of their categories against stiff competition.
Some automakers’ vehicles consistently do well in important areas such as handling, braking, or fuel economy, which weigh heavily in our Ratings.


We think consumers should focus on buying the best car for their needs, no matter who builds it or where it is built. The automakers that typically do best in our Ratings tend to build well-rounded vehicles that appeal to a broad audience. “Buyers want impeccable quality, reliability, basic space for what they have to do, package size, good performance, and good fuel economy,” says David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, a consulting group in Ann Arbor, Mich.


TEST RESULTS VS. RELIABILITY

If the only things that mattered to a car buyer were performance, comfort, and safety, Volkswagen would be at the top of the heap. Its Volkswagen and Audi models do well in handling, braking, and standard safety features. But few VWs have decent reliability.

Mercedes-Benz is an even more striking example. Its cars have the fourth-highest average test score at 77. They handle well, are nicely finished, and ride comfortably. But none has good-enough reliability to be recommended. By contrast, Toyotas have been very reliable, but some models such as the FJ Cruiser SUV and Yaris subcompact were disappointing in our tests.

Cars from Detroit automakers range across the lot in reliability. Ford has a number of good cars that did well in our survey, but about a quarter of the Ford products we have tested had below average reliability. GM also builds some vehicles that did well in reliability, but about one-third of the tested GM vehicles were rated below average.

While our surveys show that reliability of new American cars and trucks has been getting closer to the levels of Japanese vehicles, Cole says there is a limit to easy improvements.

Overall we recommend a much smaller percentage of U.S. cars than Japanese makes (37 percent vs. 80 percent), mainly because their reliability is hit-or-miss, not consistent like that of vehicles from some Japanese companies. We do not recommend models with below-average reliability. American vehicles tend to be more reliable than those from Europe. The consistently high reliability of some Japanese companies, such as Honda, Subaru, and Toyota, allows us to recommend their new models.


THE JAPANESE MYTH

Honda and Toyota are lauded for their reliability and have built a number of high-rated models, including 7 of our 10 Top Picks. But we found that not all Japanese cars excel.

“Honda and Toyota are really on a pedestal,” says James Rubenstein, an automotive analyst at Miami University, in Oxford, Ohio. But other Japanese makers, such as Nissan, Mazda, and Mitsubishi, have struggled to build high-quality cars consistently.

Nissan’s lineup, on average, actually scores above Toyota’s in CR’s tests, 75 vs. 70. Nissan also produces several of the most reliable cars in our survey, including Infiniti sedans. But three Nissans--the Armada,Titan, and Infiniti QX56--were among models with the most reliability problems in our survey; all are made in the same plant in Canton, Miss. Ford vehicles, in comparison, have slightly better reliability in our survey than cars from Nissan.

Mazda vehicles test well, but reliability has been hit-or-miss. For example, it took several years for all versions of the Mazda6 to come up to average reliability. The average Mitsubishi scores only a 60 in CR’s testing and has average reliability. Mitsubishi’s Eclipse sports coupe scored too low in our road tests for us to recommend it. Though every manufacturer has recalls, even Toyota has taken some heat over its 10 recalls of 657,000 vehicles in the past year, although that is not a factor in our reliability Ratings.


HOW U.S. MAKERS STACK UP

In our testing, we found that some recent models from Ford and GM are competitive with the better Japanese or European models. For example, the Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, and Cadillac CTS scored well in our tests. The Fusion/Milan has excellent reliability.

Even so, American cars seldom lead their categories against excellent competition. Consider the Ford Five Hundred and its siblings, the Ford Freestyle and Mercury Montego. They all scored well in our testing and are recommended models. But the Five Hundred and its siblings “didn’t have any styling or features or technology that the Japanese hadn’t had for years,” says David Healy, an auto-industry analyst with Burnham Securities.

Ford’s chief engineer, Paul Mascarenas, says that when redesigning its models, Ford is now using competitors’ vehicles as its benchmarks instead of just improving on its own outgoing models.

A contrasting case is GM’s Chevrolet Impala. Although updated last year, the car has a dated platform and engine. Interior materials improved, but the rear seat was cramped for such a large sedan, and fuel economy was mediocre.

One big hurdle that U.S. manufacturers face is cost. They “have to take billions out of new car development or marketing to cover the legacy costs” for retiree benefits, says Jim Hall, a vice president at the AutoPacific consulting group.

Limited development budgets are a particular problem, given the recent competitiveness of value-priced models from Korean manufacturers Hyundai and Kia.


HIGHS AND LOWS

The areas where many U.S. cars fall down are many of the same ones that we consider most important, such as reliability, fuel economy, braking, and handling.

General Motors, the largest automaker, has had some hits and misses, judging by the 42 models we have tested. The Chevrolet Avalanche and Corvette rank near the top of their classes in our testing. But lackluster products such as GM’s outdated minivans and compact pickups counter their good scores. Many GM vehicles wind up with mediocre test scores because of subpar braking, emergency handling, and real-world fuel economy. On the plus side, fit and finish of GM models has greatly improved.

Ford’s cars consistently handle well and ride comfortably, and its trucks and SUVs have good interior space and utility. But braking, refinement, and fuel economy are typical complaints.

Chrysler has the lowest test scores after Suzuki, at 51. Several new Chryslers, including the Sebring and the Dodge Caliber, have noisy engines, bad visibility, and cheap-looking interiors. One of our engineers likened sitting in a Caliber to being in a plastic ice cooler.

Some companies with smaller lineups consistently design well-rounded vehicles. All the Hondas we tested were reliable, and most had smooth, refined engines and transmissions, good fuel economy, handling, fit and finish, and crash-test scores. Almost all suffered from road noise. Mazda also has a smaller lineup, and all but one had good handling and braking in our tests. Most were noisy.

Like GM,Toyota has a large lineup, increasing the challenge of producing consistently excellent vehicles. Eight other automakers had higher average scores, leaving Toyota just mid-pack in this respect. While tested Toyota vehicles are very reliable and most have good fuel economy, they lacked agility in our testing.


THE TECHNOLOGY DIVIDE

Technology that aids fuel economy also sets automakers apart. Higher-tech multivalve engines, improved fuel injection, and diesel or hybrid technology improve efficiency but add cost. Some carmakers have also adopted expensive yet efficient five- and six-speed automatic transmissions to improve fuel economy and performance. But domestic automakers have been using older four-speed automatics. While 69 percent of GM models are still available with four-speed automatics, only 33 percent of Toyotas are. Four-speeds are in 39 percent of Ford’s lineup and 64 percent of Chrysler’s. All models from Audi, BMW, Honda, Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, and Volvo have at least five speeds.

Mascarenas says Ford, which has advanced five- and six-speed transmissions and CVTs in much of its lineup, will have higher fuel-economy targets, evident in its lineup, by the 2009 model year.

When we compared fuel economy vs. acceleration, BMW, Honda, Mazda, and Toyota were top performers. Chrysler, Ford, GM, Hyundai, and Subaru vehicles had the least performance per gallon.

“U.S. automakers pay lip service to fuel economy, and there is some drift in that direction,” says Healy. “But it is not a stampede.”

Bob Lutz, General Motors’ head of global product development, acknowledges that “there has been this perception that Ford, GM, and Chrysler are not forthcoming with new technology.” He says GM has pushed cylinder cut-out technology that disables half an engine’s cylinders when power demand is low. Most of those engines, however, are in large vehicles with unimpressive fuel economy. (Honda and Chrysler also use the technology.)


CAN DETROIT CATCH UP?

Hall, at AutoPacific, says that from the 1970s to the ‘90s, Detroit’s attention was focused on finance, sales volume, debt repayment, and other factors--everything but customers. “The domestics are trying to fix three to four decades of not caring about the product,” he says, “and that’s not going to be turned around overnight.”

For American carmakers to catch up, they can no longer afford to merely improve on their older models, experts say. They must build better cars than Honda and Toyota.

“There’s been a big change in attitudes at those companies,” says Rubenstein. “It took them forever to own up to the fact that they weren’t competitive. Now they’re trying to buy enough time to finish fixing it.”

[Mitch]

Reliability trends
Our latest survey tracks a decade’s worth of trouble

MOST RELIABLE The Lexus LS tops our survey, year in and year out. The 1998 LS400 had fewer problems than the 2006 Mercedes-Benz ML500.Some 9- and 10-year old vehicles have aged gracefully and have fewer problems than much newer models. This is the news from our latest Annual Car Reliability Survey, which has expanded to include vehicles up to a decade old, spanning from the 1997 model year to 2006.

For example, the 1998 Lexus LS400 had slightly fewer problems than the 2006 Mercedes-Benz ML500.

On average, the biggest increase in problem rates are between 5- and 6-year-old cars, which is when many owners begin thinking about selling their car. And that is where many Toyotas and Hondas shine in reliability. On the other hand, there’s less of a difference in reliability among 8- to 10-year-old models.

Toyotas and Hondas hold up the best. An average 10-year-old from those automakers had the same number, or fewer, problems than a 4- to 5-year-old from Hyundai, the domestic automakers, or Volkswagen. Ford had fewer problems than Chrysler and GM for 3-year-old and older vehicles. Volkswagen showed the steepest increase in problems as its vehicles age. New models from Hyundai are edging closer to the Japanese in reliability, but older models had many more problems than the domestic manufacturers. Nissan had the highest problem rates for 2- and 3-year-old models among the eight manufacturers, but the third lowest rate among 4-year-old and older models.

We revised the trouble spots for 2006, so the problem rates aren’t strictly comparable to prior years’ surveys. Still, when comparing new cars by nationality, one trend still stands out: The Japanese and South Koreans continue to make the most reliable vehicles,with 11 problems per 100 vehicles on average.U.S. automakers follow, with 16 problems per 100. European manufacturers continue to lag, with 19 problems per 100.



GOOD START Some new Ford models--such as the Ford Fusion, Lincoln Zephyr (now called the MKZ, above), and Mercury Milan--are challenging the reliability of competing models from Toyota and Honda in their first year.
BEST NEW MODELS

Of the 43 models on the Most Reliable list, 36 were from Japanese manufacturers. Six came from the domestic automakers, and one came from South Korea. Twenty-one Toyota vehicles earned top ratings. Honda had 10 vehicles at the top of our Ratings. Ford and GM each had three, Subaru and Nissan each had two.

The Lincoln Zephyr, now called the MKZ, had a sterling first year in reliability. Its platform mates, the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, also did well. Some new or redesigned models from GM--the Buick Lucerne, Cadillac DTS, and Chevrolet Tahoe--were very reliable, as was Hyundai’s Azera. This is promising and gives the consumer more choices than ever in finding reliable new vehicles.


WHERE WE FOUND TROUBLE

The 2006 survey drew responses for about 1.3 million vehicles from Consumer Reports and ConsumerReports.org subscribers, who were asked about serious problems they’d experienced with their cars in the past 12 months. To better understand the types of problems owners are having, we revised some of the trouble areas on our questionnaire. We added audio system as a new category and separated major engine problems, such as an engine rebuild, from minor engine problems.We also expanded air conditioning to encompass climate-system problems, including heating, and we defined transmission to include the clutch (see Reliability Ratings, available to subscribers).

You don’t always have to look hard to find trouble. While the typical problem rate for each trouble spot in our survey is fairly low, even for 10-year-old vehicles, some models stand out as especially problematic in some areas. For example:
More than half of the 2004 Infiniti QX56, Nissan Armada, and Nissan Titan owners reported a brake problem. And almost half of 2005 Armada and Titan owners also reported brake problems.


The 1999 BMW 5 Series V8 had the worst engine-cooling-problem rate, with 34 percent. In addition, 2000 to 2001 BMW 5 Series V8 and BMW 7 Series all had about 30 percent of their owners reporting engine-cooling woes.


About a third of 2001 Chrysler Town & Countrys and Dodge Grand Caravans had problems with power equipment such as windows and sliding doors.


Another third of the respondents with the 2001 Mercedes-Benz C-Class V6 griped about serious electrical problems,as did nearly a third of the 2004 Volkswagen Touareg owners.


Nearly a quarter of owners of the 2001 Acura CL reported a bad transmission problem, and nearly the same percentage of 1999 Volvo XC70s were reported to suffer from fuel-system problems.


The 1998 Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer and the 2004 Mercedes-Benz S-Class ( V8 ) had the most temperamental audio systems, with about 20 percent of respondents reporting trouble.

[Joe 123]

C'est pourri ce sondage il n'y a pas de véhicules américains!!! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Pour ceux qui n'ont pas compris mon message je réponds à la place des pro-américains...

[dopefishzzz]

"Nearly a quarter of owners of the 2001 Acura CL reported a bad transmission problem"

... et apres ca on vient m'obstiner que les tranny japonaises font toutes 300,000km :lol:

[Joe 123]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Dave]

Très intéressant ces articles !!! Ça montre plusieurs points intéressants.

Ça l'a rien d'un scandale finalement, ce sont des faits !!!!

[dedemo]

Je suis surpris de voir la Sienna en avant de la Odyssey. C'est sûrement à cause de l'arrivée du nouveau 3,5L et de son prix, qui est maintenant nettement inférieur à Honda. Décidemment la Odyssey est de moins en moins une mini-fourgonnette pour le consommateur moyen. :cry:

[mark46l]

Je suis surpris de voir la Sienna en avant de la Odyssey. C'est sûrement à cause de l'arrivée du nouveau 3,5L et de son prix, qui est maintenant nettement inférieur à Honda. Décidemment la Odyssey est de moins en moins qui est de moins une mini-fourgonnette pour le consommateur moyen. :cry:

Moi ce que je trouve surprenant de voir l'accord devant la camry!

pourquoi pas l'altima meme(je reve p-e! :P )

[Joe 123]

Je suis surpris de voir la Sienna en avant de la Odyssey. C'est sûrement à cause de l'arrivée du nouveau 3,5L et de son prix, qui est maintenant nettement inférieur à Honda. Décidemment la Odyssey est de moins en moins qui est de moins une mini-fourgonnette pour le consommateur moyen. :cry:

L'Odyssey va peut-être changer bientôt à cause de l'arrivée du nouveau MDX...

[Sames]

L'Odyssey va peut-être changer bientôt à cause de l'arrivée du nouveau MDX...

mmm...ça me surprendrait, Honda a l'habitude de garder ses véhicules 5 ans avant de les changer pis l'Odyssey est apparue en 2005 donc, théoriquement pas avant 2010

[Joe 123]

Vous n'avez pas tout à fait tort....