Topic: Consumer Reports Names 10 Best And Worst Cars For The Dollar

[Autos_Editor]

Nissan Armada racks up the highest cost per mile in study while Toyota Prius costs the least

Read More...

[inco]

Ouch. Not one domestic brand in the best list.

[Frontier1]

 Pathfinder

[Snowman]

Two Subarus on the best list 

[JohnM]

Impossible to feel sympathy for anyone who buys something called an "Armada Platinum".

Mostly the usual suspects on both lists.  Although it's nice to see a Jag not on the Worst List.

Cheers,
John M.

[Solstice2006]

nice to see some VW on the 10 best, reliability must be improving.....

[tooscoops]

not sure i understand this list.... by definition, wouldn't the most expensive cars automatically be worse "cars for the dollar"? a $150,000 car is 2500 a month for 5 years if we are going with full retail value....

and if we are supposed to only include depreciation, how is a wrangler, a 4 time winner of retained value awards, on the worst bang for your buck?... not to mention its the only real special purpose car on the list (off-road + convertible)

another issue with this is that cr tend to use full msrp to figure out "value"... when almost every domestic car has cash on the hood. it's the manufacturers fault, but it really doesn't gave a true number to base value on.

i feel like this list is more a, "which cars cost less on gas over 5 years"

[MarkStevenson]

not sure i understand this list.... by definition, wouldn't the most expensive cars automatically be worse "cars for the dollar"? a $150,000 car is 2500 a month for 5 years if we are going with full retail value....

and if we are supposed to only include depreciation, how is a wrangler, a 4 time winner of retained value awards, on the worst bang for your buck?... not to mention its the only real special purpose car on the list (off-road + convertible)

another issue with this is that cr tend to use full msrp to figure out "value"... when almost every domestic car has cash on the hood. it's the manufacturers fault, but it really doesn't gave a true number to base value on.

i feel like this list is more a, "which cars cost less on gas over 5 years"

Agreed. The title seemed off to me too.

I don't subscribe to CR so I can't see the numbers behind the rankings. However, this is what they say online on the summary teaser:

We think that real value is not necessarily how much you spend but what you get for your money. Vehicles that are reliable, perform well, and don't cost much to own represent the best values. Overall, small cars and sedans provide the best bang for the buck.

Our list (shown in rank order) below highlights models that offer the best or worst combination of performance, utility, and reliability for the money, considering all owner costs over a five-year period. All have an automatic transmission, except where noted, and typical options. Best values are all recommended.

[sailor723]

They must not be including depreciation but rather just looking at out of pocket operating costs.

[normancw]

I don't subscribe to CR so I can't see the numbers behind the rankings.

Here is an excerpt from the CR article.

Best new-car values
Which models give you the most bang for the buck?
...
To ­determine which models deliver the most, we analyzed more than 200 vehicles that we recently tested and are currently on sale, focusing on their road-test scores, predicted reliability, and five-year owner-cost estimates. (See “What Makes a Great Value?” below) In short, the better a car performs in our tests and reliability ratings, and the less it costs to own, the better its value.

What makes a great value

To determine which vehicles give you the most for your money, we look at three important things when calculating our value ratings for each model:

Road-test score. The road-test score reflects how good a vehicle is overall. Each car’s score is the result of more than 50 tests and evaluations performed at our test track and on public roads. We measure performance, comfort, convenience, fuel economy, fit and finish, cargo space, and more. Ratings are based on a 100-point scale and range from a high of 99 for the Tesla Model S electric luxury car to a low of 20 for the crude, off-road-ready Jeep Wrangler. If a car doesn’t perform well enough, we can’t recommend it.

Predicted-reliability score. We forecast how well new models are likely to hold up based on their recent history. The information comes from our latest Annual Auto Survey, in which subscribers told us about problems they’ve experienced with 1.2 million vehicles in the last 12 months. If a model has a below-average reliability score, we won’t recommend it no matter how well it performed in our road tests. For example, the V6 Honda Accord earned an impressive 90 points in our testing, but owners reported more problems with it than for the average model, so we can’t recommend it. New or redesigned models for which we don’t have survey data, such as the Chevrolet Impala, are not included in our value study.

Five-year owner costs. Estimates of owner costs include all major expenses incurred during a typical five-year ownership cycle, including depreciation, fuel, insurance premiums, interest on financing, sales tax, and maintenance and repairs. In the charts below, they are shown as cost per mile.

Depreciation is by far the largest factor, accounting for almost half of all owner costs over the first five years; our analysis assumes the cars will be traded in after five years. Fuel is the second largest expense. We use the national average of 12,000 miles per year to calculate costs. Maintenance and repair costs come from our Annual Auto Survey.

We excluded electric cars (such as the Chevrolet Volt, Nissan Leaf, and Tesla Model S) from our analysis, because of the lack of data on their depreciation and on maintenance and repair costs.

Best & worst for the money

Here you can see the models with the highest and lowest value scores in several major categories. Models are ranked by value score, above or below the average car, which is represented by a score of 1.0. Scores are calculated based on a model’s five-year ownership costs, shown here as cost per mile, road-test score, and predicted reliability rating. A vehicle with a score of 2.0 is twice as good a value as the average car, and one that scores a 0.5 is half as good. The best values in each category are all recommended models. The models with the lowest value scores are listed below the gray lines.

[tooscoops]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

[PJ]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

I agree with you.  CR have always been very biased against any car that does not fit their narrow definition of what a car should be.

[Thinking Out Loud]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

I agree with you.  CR have always been very biased against any car that does not fit their narrow definition of what a car should be.

x3  (from a Wrangler guy )

[tenpenny]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

I agree with you.  CR have always been very biased against any car that does not fit their narrow definition of what a car should be.

I'm pretty sure that every publication is biased against things that don't fit their definition.

That said, I think your comment shows that you've never read CR.  Or, at the very least, never understood it.


Sent from my Vic20 using Java Moose

[Snowman]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

CR reviews vehicles from the perspective of the average consumer who represents the majority of buyers. A Jeep with its narrow gauge, short wheel base, and high center of gravity is a disaster as daily driver especially in low traction conditions. Now take a Jeep off road and it a different story, unfortunately 99% will never see the conditions that it was designed for.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I never pay much attention to their road tests, only their reliability ratings. Even then, now, I look at the point by point ratings because of stupidity like the Cruze ratings (below).

How can the Cruze 1.8L (the 1.4T is actually above average) get a below average rating, when the lowest rated parameter was "average"? It makes no sense.

[Solstice2006]

I never pay much attention to their road tests, only their reliability ratings. Even then, now, I look at the point by point ratings because of stupidity like the Cruze ratings (below).

How can the Cruze 1.8L (the 1.4T is actually above average) get a below average rating, when the lowest rated parameter was "average"? It makes no sense.

Yeah I don't get it either.  I know quite a few people who own the Cruze with different engines, never had a problem.  It sells very well, good quality interior, has been around Europe before here, decent performer, but CR is one of the few publications that shows below average reliability.  But the Verano shares some things, with a 2.4L engine, and has above average... I hate Consumer Reports... I like going through the forums, the used car Wheels section, and here.

[Fobroader]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

I wholeheartedly agree  Anyone who buys a Wrangler and then complains about its ride, noise, build quality and fuel mileage to CR shouldnt be allowed outside without proper adult supervision and a helmet.

[MarkStevenson]

as a jeep lover, i just can never really listen to cr.  i mean, a 20 for overall drive?  have you no blood pumping through your veins? my god... not everyone wants a complaint ride that makes it possible to sit down and read a good book and have a cup of tea while driving.

performance and utility are taken into consideration?... i think very lightly. unless they mean utility to carry their clipboard and no people since they have no friends, and performance based on smoothness at the speed limit.

purely just my opinion of cr... so by no means take me very seriously.

CR reviews vehicles from the perspective of the average consumer who represents the majority of buyers. A Jeep with its narrow gauge, short wheel base, and high center of gravity is a disaster as daily driver especially in low traction conditions. Now take a Jeep off road and it a different story, unfortunately 99% will never see the conditions that it was designed for.

While I'll 100% agree it is not the best daily driver, it certainly isn't the disaster it once was. I drove a Wrangler and Wrangler Unlimited over the summer and I was surprised how refined they've made it in recent years. It used to be one of the vehicles with the worst clutch action in the world. Now it's pretty average and a lot lighter. The suspension is also a lot more forgiving these days.

Still no family sedan or car based SUV though.

Sent from my SGH-I317M using Tapatalk

[blotter]

this is another waste of "ink" by Consumer Reports.

They're trying to capture far too many variables to make this meaningful.

cost of financing alone is very subjective.  Did they compare cost of financing through the dealerships at the time they made this list?   We all know financing changes all the time. 

And the Wrangler thing... what, they're on the worse list because the cost difference between a Honda Fit?   How can anyone really take this "study" seriously???    Nobody is going to compare and cross shop the two.    So the "worse list" gets penalized because they're not as "cost efficient" as small cars or sedans.  Well that's a no brainer.  But some people have needs which take them out of the car category.



There are tons of Wranglers around here and I'd say 90% of them never see offroad use.
it's a specific vehicle that projects a special imagine and many around here want or like.

I'm surprised to see the Impreza on the list yet the more fuel efficient Crosstrek doesn't make it?


Is anyone here surprised that cars cost less to run than big SUVs or trucks?
There are a few exceptions but they've basically made a list of small to mid sized cars on the good list and big SUVs and trucks on the worse list.   wow... what a surprise.