Consumer Reports Auto Issue: Best and Worst Cars for 2011

[lawren2 Malibu Beach Barbie & A Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close lawren2]

Consumer Reports Auto Issue: Best and Worst Cars for 2011
Consumer Reports Auto Issue: Best and Worst Cars for 2011

It’s that time of year again! The annual auto issue of Consumer Reports landed in my mailbox yesterday, and I spent some time browsing its pages. I’m not nearly as interested in car info as I used to be; I’ve had my beloved Mini Cooper for two years now, and am quite pleased with it. Still, I know that many folks are in the market for a new car, and I think Consumer Reports is a great source for info. Plus, it’s fun to review their findings to see what (if anything) has changed.

Note: You can read my summaries of past Consumer Reports auto issues here: 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010.

This year, the Consumer Reports website — even the part that’s not behind a paywall — has more useful information than in past years. In fact, there are video reports on each of the magazine’s top cars, plus other video content scattered around the auto section. Nice! Here, for instance, is their preview of the upcoming Nissan Leaf:



You can access all of the free, public content from the site’s April 2011 issue homepage. But let’s review some of the major news.

Here are the Consumer Reports top-rated vehicles in ten categories (with previous years’ top cars in parentheses). Note that I’ve linked each category to its corresponding page at the CR website, where you can watch informative video profiles of each top vehicle.

•Budget car: Honda Fit (new category, replacing Luxury Sedan — a sign of the times?)
•Family hauler (formerly Minivan): Toyota Sienna (2010: Mazda5, 2007-2009: Toyota Sienna)
•Family sedan: Nissan Altima (2010: Nissan Altima, 2007-2009: Honda Accord)
•Family SUV (formerly Midsized SUV): Kia Sorento (2010: Chevrolet Traverse, 2009: Toyota Highlander, 2008: Hyundai Santa Fe, 2007: Toyota Highlander Hybrid)
•Green car: Toyota Prius (2007-2010: Toyota Prius)
•Pickup Truck: Chevrolet Avalanche (2010: Chevrolet Silverado 1500, 2009: Chevrolet Avalanche, 2008: Chevrolet Silverado 1500, no pick in 2007)
•Small car (formerly Small sedan): Hyundai Elantra (2008-2010: Hyundai Elantra SE, 2007: Honda Civic)
•Small SUV: Toyota RAV4 (2010: Subaru Forester, 2007-2009: Toyota RAV4)
•Sports sedan (formerly Upscale sedan): Infiniti G37 (2009-2010: Infiniti G37, 2007-2008: Infiniti G35)
•Sporty Car (formerly Fun-to-drive): Ford Mustang (2010: Volkswagen GTI, 2007-2009: Mazda MX-5 Miata)

In previous years, Consumer Reports selected a “best car overall”, which was usually the luxury Lexus LS 460L. With 99 out of a possible 100 points in the magazine’s road test, the LS 460L is still a fine vehicle — but because they no longer pick a top car or a top luxury car, it didn’t make any particular list. (By comparison, the Mini Cooper still scores an 81 on the road test.)

I was sad to see the “most overlooked cars” list didn’t re-appear this year. In the past, it’s shown which cars are safe and received good road scores, but don’t sell well too the public. As usual, though, there are plenty of other lists.

For example, here are the least expensive cars over five years (based on total owner cost):

•Honda Fit (base) — $26,250
•Smart ForTwo — $27,000
•Toyota Yaris sedan — $27,250
•Scion xD — $27,750
•Toyota Corolla LE — $28,000

The most expensive car to own? A Mercedes-Benz SL550, which costs an average of $112,250 over five years. Yikes! No wonder there’s a small group of GRS readers who have chosen to go car-free. Even the cheapest car — the Honda Fit — costs an average of $444 per month during the first five years of ownership. You could save a heck of a lot if you didn’t have that cost. (And most families have more than one car!)

Note: Of course, one way to keep the cost of ownership down is to keep your car a long time. Drive it into the ground. Also, buy used. The Consumer Reports car buying issue has some great info to help those in the market for a used vehicle. Unfortunately, this info is behind the website’s paywall this year.

CR says that Honda makes the best cars overall, taking the top spot from Toyota (which falls to number three). Subaru is second best. The worst cars (by a long shot) come from Chrysler, though Consumer Reports sees glimmers of hope for them on the horizon. Ford has made great improvements over the past couple of years.

As I mentioned, some of the material from the Consumer Reports 2011 Auto Issue is freely available on their website. Other information, however, is locked behind a paywall. And don’t forget that you can always find great info on the Consumer Reports car blog.

Note: Yesterday at the grocery store, I noticed that the 2011 Consumer Reports car buying guide is out, too. That provides even more in-depth info than the magazine’s annual auto issue. If I were shopping for a car, I’d pick up both.

[bigfrank Administrator Find all posts View Profile Close bigfrank]

In todays daily news Lincoln won #1 in JD Powers most reliable car. Funny how CR did not include Lincoln,Oh and BTW yes I own a new Lincoln MKS and love it.

[lawren2 Malibu Beach Barbie & A Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close lawren2]

In todays daily news Lincoln won #1 in JD Powers most reliable car. Funny how CR did not include Lincoln,Oh and BTW yes I own a new Lincoln MKS and love it.

I'm sure if you looked in the correct full category instead of justthe category winner you would find a Lincoln/Mercury.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

It is curious that they use terms like ''sports sedan'' and ''sporty car'' since there are only a handful of true sports cars still made. Their top ''sporty car'' a Mustang, is in fact more accurately a muscle car.

The purists of the Morgan Owners Club say that a true sports car does not have roll up windows. I don't know that I would go that far. My 1968 MGB has roll up windows but I still consider it a sports car. However a sports car certainly does not have more than two seats and absolutely not four doors!

I doubt they even tested Morgans, even though Morgan has been making cars since before World War I, is now the biggest British-owned carmaker, and has several US dealerships. Morgans are true sports cars, with a body design that has not changed substantially since 1939. A 2011 Morgan certainly has more eye appeal than any of the cars on Consumer Reports' list. A friend of mine had a Morgan from sometime in the 1980s and it was not only a beautiful and fun car, but the Rover V8 under the bonnet (the hood is the canvas part on the top that folds down to give you open air motoring) gave it quite a bit of speed, too.

Personally, I don't even look at new cars. The designs have been too bland and boring for several decades. I concur with the term used by one writer in British Car magazine who lumped all cars of the last decade or two together as ''jelly bean cars'' because they looked more like jelly beans than cars. It just shows what limits there are when everything is designed with a wind tunnel in mind. My cars back in the states are a 1968 MGB and a 1968 Cutlass convertible. Space limitations compelled me to sell my 1964 Studebaker GT Hawk when I took my present position. I don't yet have a car over here but I have decided not to ship over my MGB as I thought about. I may go to a British classic car show and see what deals I can find. I only drive classics. They are much more interesting, much more fun to drive, and better value. I have had several classics that I have sold for more than I have paid for them and had no real restoration expense. The Studebaker was one like that, as well as a 1968 Oldsmoblie 442 with a lot of rare options, and a 1972 Triumph Spitfire. I once bought a non-running 1954 Sunbeam-Talbot Alpine (2 seater British sports car) with a 1953 Sunbeam-Talbot 90 coupe for parts from a fellow North Carolinian with the intention of restoring it, but when I gave out my name and address to some British car parts dealers asking them to keep me in mind for several things I needed, I ended up instead getting a call from someone in Richmond, Virginia wanting to buy it and offering me sight-unseen over the phone three times what I had paid for it. When I was living in the states and driving the Cutlass convertible, I had people stop me all the time to ask if I would consider selling it and the answer was always ''no''. They also are a lot easier to repair. You can open the hood (or bonnet if it is a Brit car) and actually see most everything.

[JWC Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close JWC]

I got my Consumers Report Annual Auto Issue last week in the mail. I have studied it from cover to cover. Honda is still rated number 1 as making the best cars followed by Subaru, Toyota, etc. Chrysler is at the bottom as usual.

The Japanese automakers still domainate. Korean automaker Hyundai/Kia has moved up a lot.

Our Honda Ridgeline is rated number 1 for compact pickups as it has been since it first came out in 2006. The Honda Ridgeline is larger than most compact pickups.

Reliability is only one of the factors in how a vehicle is rated. A very realible vehicle can be rated very low due to other factors like performance, comfort, etc.

[JWC Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close JWC]

It is curious that they use terms like ''sports sedan'' and ''sporty car'' since there are only a handful of true sports cars still made. Their top ''sporty car'' a Mustang, is in fact more accurately a muscle car.

The purists of the Morgan Owners Club say that a true sports car does not have roll up windows. I don't know that I would go that far. My 1968 MGB has roll up windows but I still consider it a sports car. However a sports car certainly does not have more than two seats and absolutely not four doors!

I doubt they even tested Morgans, even though Morgan has been making cars since before World War I, is now the biggest British-owned carmaker, and has several US dealerships. Morgans are true sports cars, with a body design that has not changed substantially since 1939. A 2011 Morgan certainly has more eye appeal than any of the cars on Consumer Reports' list. A friend of mine had a Morgan from sometime in the 1980s and it was not only a beautiful and fun car, but the Rover V8 under the bonnet (the hood is the canvas part on the top that folds down to give you open air motoring) gave it quite a bit of speed, too.

Personally, I don't even look at new cars. The designs have been too bland and boring for several decades. I concur with the term used by one writer in British Car magazine who lumped all cars of the last decade or two together as ''jelly bean cars'' because they looked more like jelly beans than cars. It just shows what limits there are when everything is designed with a wind tunnel in mind. My cars back in the states are a 1968 MGB and a 1968 Cutlass convertible. Space limitations compelled me to sell my 1964 Studebaker GT Hawk when I took my present position. I don't yet have a car over here but I have decided not to ship over my MGB as I thought about. I may go to a British classic car show and see what deals I can find. I only drive classics. They are much more interesting, much more fun to drive, and better value. I have had several classics that I have sold for more than I have paid for them and had no real restoration expense. The Studebaker was one like that, as well as a 1968 Oldsmoblie 442 with a lot of rare options, and a 1972 Triumph Spitfire. I once bought a non-running 1954 Sunbeam-Talbot Alpine (2 seater British sports car) with a 1953 Sunbeam-Talbot 90 coupe for parts from a fellow North Carolinian with the intention of restoring it, but when I gave out my name and address to some British car parts dealers asking them to keep me in mind for several things I needed, I ended up instead getting a call from someone in Richmond, Virginia wanting to buy it and offering me sight-unseen over the phone three times what I had paid for it. When I was living in the states and driving the Cutlass convertible, I had people stop me all the time to ask if I would consider selling it and the answer was always ''no''. They also are a lot easier to repair. You can open the hood (or bonnet if it is a Brit car) and actually see most everything.

You are welcome to the old cars. I will take the new ones hands down. The new cars are better engineered, more reliable, more comfortable, etc. I have owned a lot of cars. The only decent car I owned prior to 1982 was my 1960 Chevrolet Impala. In 1982, I gave up on the junk coming out of Detroit and bought a new Honda Accord. We have bought nothing but Honda's since then.