|
Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors
June 2002
By editors at Edmunds.com
Date Posted 07-01-2002
Subject: Editors' versus Consumers' Most Wanted
From: Mike
It seems as if with several of your "picks," you really don't take reliability
and crash test scores very seriously. For example, you fail to mention that the
Hyundai Elantra, though it has many good attributes, has poor reliability and
IIHS crash test scores. You do mention reliability with some cars and write about
crash test scores in reference to the Honda Odyssey for example, but fail to mention
safety in other categories. The same goes with the small SUV category, the Mazda/Ford
twins had several recalls and a poor crash test score in IIHS. The CRV has excellent
crash test scores and, of course, Honda reliability. I felt the consumers' picks
made more sense.
The Consumers' Most Wanted exists to complement our own choices. We would hope
that our site users would take advantage of both. We do stand by our selections,
however. While safety and reliability are important, they certainly aren't the
only reasons to choose a vehicle. — Ed.
Subject: Consumers' Most Wanted
From: P. Lavallee
I find it funny that so many letters to your (excellent IMHO) site complain about
your bias against American nameplates. Maybe they should have put their money
(vote) where there mouth (keyboard) is. Only 2 of 29 categories were won by "American"
cars! That's simply amazing — or sad, depending on how you look at it.
Subject: Ballot Stuffing for Consumers' Most Wanted
From: T. Potter
Obviously, you had many Japanese and German car dealers and their employees logging
in and submitting votes for their cars. The pickup truck category is the dead
giveaway. The Tundra is one of the least-popular pickup trucks in the U.S. The
fact that it was selected as the consumers most popular is a sure sign that there
was ballot stuffing by Japanese and German car dealers and their employees. In
fact, it is so obvious that this occurred, I strongly suggest that, in all fairness,
this award not be shown on your website.
Subject: Consumer ratings and reviews
From: K. Tathwell
I used to use your ratings and reviews to help me decide on which vehicle to buy.
Now I can't be too sure of the accuracy. Just for kicks, I looked at the 2002
Rolls-Royce Corniche reviews. I'm sorry, but none of the reviewers actually own
one of these vehicles. A person who can afford one of these autos obviously has
to have some kind of education to make that kind of money. Did you look at the
grammar and language used? These "reviewers" probably failed the 6th grade! Did
your editors even look at what was written? These fake reviews have me doubting
the validity of all the other reviews as it appears I can "review" any car on
the list even if I have never driven it! Is this true?
Though we edit for "inappropriate" content, we allow anyone to write a review
of any vehicle. It is by no means a perfect system. Possible fixes include a requirement
that reviewers post a VIN, thereby verifying ownership, or instigating a feedback
rating system for reviews, similar to what Amazon.com does with its consumer reviews.
We welcome our readers' feedback on this issue. — Ed.
Subject: Nissan Maxima and Altima long-term tests
From: L. Schneider
Could you get two more similar cars with different names? Even if they're not
that similar, I doubt you'll need two years to figure that out. Why not get something
a little less similar like a Volvo S60 or Subaru Impreza?
Subject: Editors' Most Wanted
From: S. Mele
In response to your editors most wanted vehicles for 2002 I have a concern about
your judging. In regards to your "large pickup" category you selected the Ford
F-150 as a top pick by "type." Maybe it's just me, but every review I read about
that truck puts it in a category of being outdated, low buck interior finish and
design, unrefined and in dire need of an update. I am not trashing Ford. I think
they make some really great products, but just because they sell more trucks than
all the other manufacturers does not and should not make them the best. However,
how can anyone honestly believe that the Ford F-150 is a better truck than the
Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra twins, redesigned Dodge Ram and the Toyota Tundra (although
some may consider this truck not quite "full size")?
For the Editors' Most Wanted awards, our editorial staff gathers to hash over
the roster of current models available to the public. Only current models are
eligible, and at least one member of our editorial team has to have driven the
vehicle prior to our deadline. This results in a list of cars and trucks we'd
want in our own garages.
In 2000, we conducted a fullsize truck comparison
test in which the F-150 beat out the Chevy Silverado, Toyota Tundra and Dodge
Ram. The only truck that has changed significantly since then is the Ram. While
the 2002 Ram is indeed a great truck, it's fairly limited in terms of body styles
and powertrains. The F-150, on the other hand, offers a plethora of choices. It
is this freedom of choice that enticed our editors. Of course, things might change
for 2003, as General Motors will be updating its trucks and Dodge will be offering
all-new 2500 and 3500 trucks, as well as additional powertrains. — Ed.
Subject: True Market Value
From: Feeny
I would like to know how a dealer is supposed to sell a vehicle for $200 under
invoice without factory to dealer incentives. Case in point a 2002 Town & Country
EX. I took a look at your supposed true market value for this vehicle and nowhere
is the advertising charge to be found on your invoice pricing. Not even so much
as a note to consumers to let them know that this vehicle pricing does not include
the mandatory advertising fees that dealerships pay to the manufacturer. I find
this in very poor taste. You are supposed to look out for the consumer not pull
the wool over there eyes. Believe me, I love the internet for shopping. I just
personally used it to find a mortgage and shop for houses, it is a great tool
when the right information is given.
With your practice of not even letting a customer know that there is not an advertising
fee included in your quotes, you are doing them a great disservice. It is no wonder
why customers expect to pay less than what they end up paying — you prepare
them with the wrong information!
Advertising fees, and several other charges, are regional and, as such, are
difficult for us to track. In some areas, an advertising fee is charged, in others
it is not. To complicate things further, some dealers try to charge their own
advertising fees that are listed in the contract, but not on the invoice. In our
story 10 Steps to Buying
a New Car, we write:
If the ad fee is in the car's invoice, paying it seems unavoidable.
If it has been written into the dealership's contract as an additional item,
you may be able to get it removed. We know buyers who have protested the fee
and successfully bought the car without paying it.
In addition, we recommend that consumers, in the early stages of car buying ask
if there will be any extra charges besides the destination fee listed on all invoices.
This will prepare them for the total cost of buying the car. — Ed.
Subject: Fuel Economy
From: budmoore11
You people need to get a clue. While your reviews are generally informative they
often fail to give the one piece of information most people are after and it called
MPG or miles per gallon. Not EPA but real world driving.
We might question as to whether "most" people are really interested in fuel
economy. According to the EPA, average light-vehicle fuel economy continues to
decline. Since peaking at 22.1 mpg in 1987 and 1988, average light-vehicle fuel
economy has declined nearly 8 percent to 20.4 mpg, and for 2001 and 2002 is lower
than it has been at any time since 1980. This is largely a result of America's
growing appetite for larger trucks and SUVs. Regardless, every full road test
we've posted since 2000 includes EPA ratings as well as our own observed vehicle
fuel economy on the performance worksheet. — Ed.
Subject: Lexus GS 300
From: R. Anantha
You have the GS 300 as an Editors' Most Wanted selection, but in the overview
you say "think twice before buying." Which is it?
The Editors' Most Wanted selection included the GS 300 and GS 430. If you read
the overviews for the GS 300 and GS 430, you'll see we're more partial to the
GS 430 than the 300. — Ed.
Subject: True cost to own
From: J. Meise
I have searched your site and the rest of the web and have been unable to find
information that helps me — or perhaps I am asking the wrong questions. I
have a long commute that racks up roughly 25k miles each year on my car. This
means any vehicle I purchase depreciates rapidly. What I am trying to figure out
is, what's the best move for me? Since I would prefer not to run a car with high
mileage (and it doesn't appear to make sense anyway) what car should I buy and
how long should I keep it? For example, should I go ahead and buy an Acura TL
since it holds more of its value than most? Or should I buy a Jetta, also very
popular. By my math (and your TMV), both seem to cost about $6,000 per year to
run for my commute even though they are about $4-5k apart in price.
My current thinking is to buy new cars and turn them in every two years —
around the 50k mile mark for me. I have a 2001 Maxima that is less than one year
old with 24k miles already. When do I trade in? Previously I bought a used Bonneville
and it was virtually worthless with 100k on it. No site has quality calculators
to help me determine depreciation. Any thoughts — or future editorial on
the subject would be greatly appreciated.
You're in luck. We've recently launched a new tool called Cost to Own that will help you shop for your next car. If you are considering
a certain car, you can quickly see, on an easy-to-read table, how it depreciates
over the first 5 years of its life. It also computes the approximate cost per
mile to drive the car. These figures will help you find the most economical car
to drive at every stage of the vehicle's life.
Obviously, the high mileage you put on a car will affect the car's value. However,
it will likely affect the low-depreciating cars less than cars with high depreciation.
When researching the best car to buy, look up your favorite candidate. Then scroll
down to the section called "Compare Similar Vehicles." Here you will find the
essential information on all the competing models summarized in one chart. Additionally,
you will see quite clearly how some cars hold their value while others depreciate
alarmingly. — Ed.
Subject: Can't thank you enough
From: T. Moskau
I want to take time out of my automotive workweek (72 to 85 hours) to thank you
for keeping car shoppers "informed." My paycheck has increased year to date almost
$25,000 over the last few years thanks to you and all the other internet sites
out there trying to help these people to buy a car. It seems that people forgot
the only thing they need to know: shop a couple of stores and buy from who you
like with the cheapest price. Instead, these people are all basing their purchases
off of information and advice instead of good ole American car shopping.
Oh yeah, when will banks and acceptance corporations start using your numbers
instead of N.A.D.A. when loaning money. And why do private party prices always
seem cheaper than dealer prices? Everyone knows that people sell their cars on
their own to get more for them than at the dealer.
Good question. When you sell to a private party, the buyer is only interested
in getting a good deal on your car. When you sell to a dealer, the dealer has
to get a great deal on your car to make up for his cost to perform any necessary
work before reselling it to someone else for a profit or trading it to another
dealer at wholesale. — Ed.
|
