# Cosumer reports bashed the beetle



## htg39 (Oct 2, 2011)

Don't read the article very few overall positives when comparing it with others in its class....the most positive thing was the coming of the Turbo Disel whenever that is.....with all the Unhappy Buyers out there this just adds to to VW'S Woes with the Beetle....Harvey


----------



## ridgemanron (Sep 27, 2011)

Can only speak about my black Turbo Beetle, but I continue to be amazed at the reaction
this car gets from all types of people. Even had one guy on a BMW motorcycle tell me how
'Porsche like' the car looks. And when I tell them the base price is about $24,000 they are
very impressed. My impression is that the 2.5's look to be 'pure VW' but the Turbo cars
are just tweaked differently enough to evoke thoughts of Porsche. Maybe my Golf R wheels
add to the appeal, since the style was even decided for the Beetle R concept car. 

P.S. - Just for general information I thought I'd mention that when I went back to the 
VW Racing shop where I had my ECU Flashed, the owner was dismantling a lot of things
on the 2012 Golf R he just purchased. Part of the dismantling concerned the switching of
wheels to a lighter racing type and racing tires as well. He had the wheels, with original
Dunlop tires on them, on a rack and looking perfectly new. He's asking $1,600 for the
wheels with the tires and I remember that the list price on the Golf R rims was $3,000.
Add to that the value of the Golf R OEM tires and it would seem to me that it is really a
great price. Heck, anyone able to buy them in person can even get him to mount them 
for free. The shop is TyrolSport, located in Ridgewood, N.Y., 1645 Stephen St., Zip 11385
Phone - 917-626-3368, Email: [email protected]


----------



## TragicallyHip (Jan 25, 2011)

I might read CR when shopping for a refrigerator. I pretty much ignore their advice on cars. You don't buy a Beetle based on CR's projected repair frequency for electrical accessories. You buy it because you want a Beetle. 

I've had enough experience with VW that I expect more issues than a Japanese brand but fewer issues than an American brand (don't get me started about GM ABS systems). I don't expect to put a ton of miles on it, so I was able to pick up an 8 year bumper-to-bumper extended warranty for next to nothing, so I feel confident that whatever happens, I won't be spending much on repairs for my tenure with the car.

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## RedTurboS (Sep 17, 2005)

Can you copy the article and paste it in here for us to read? Unless you have a subscription you can't read Consumer Reports articles. I curious to see what it has to say. 

Thanks!


----------



## silverspeedbuggy (Aug 8, 2001)

CR has never been a VW fan.


----------



## htg39 (Oct 2, 2011)

*consumer reports*

I would if I knew how...there are not a lot of Positives...Harvey


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

CR bashes anything that isnt Toyota.


----------



## Sixtysomething (Aug 7, 2003)

Very true. If a car isn't Japanese, it's pretty much junk in CR's eyes. They always bash VW's electrical issues, but they never mention how Asian cars in northern climates rust in half the time (if not less) it takes European cars.


----------



## LindsayLowhan (May 29, 2010)

Consumer Reports also rated the Range Rover Evoque horribly. That is like calling snow black.


----------



## shgolden (Oct 29, 2003)

silverspeedbuggy said:


> CR has never been a VW fan.


Nope. CR rates the Golf TDI and the GTI very highly. They don't like the newer VW models because they have been cheapend to save costs (although they did score the new Passat high enough to be recommended if it has average or better reliability, but it scored lower than the previous generation).

The new Jetta and Beetle rated too low to be recommended. The 2.5L is not competitive with other cars in its classes concerning gas mileage. The Beetle's emergency handling was not very good as it slid before the ESC kicked in to correct it.


----------



## shgolden (Oct 29, 2003)

fiftysomething said:


> Very true. If a car isn't Japanese, it's pretty much junk in CR's eyes. They always bash VW's electrical issues, but they never mention how Asian cars in northern climates rust in half the time (if not less) it takes European cars.


Nope. CR didn't like the new Honda Civic because it scored much, much lower than its previous generation. They noted that like the Jetta, the new Civic has been cheapend, and they didn't like its handling, ride, and its interior fit and finish. The Toyota Yaris and the new Nissan Versa sedan also rated too low to be recommended.


----------



## RedTurboS (Sep 17, 2005)

Can you just copy and paste the article into the forum here?


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

*FV-QR*

I read a summary and it looks like they based the interior plastic materials on the base models, which leads me to the question; is the interior any different panel/ dash wise? 



CR said:


> For 2012 VW introduces the second generation of the reincarnated Beetle. It’s wider and longer than the last one, and the trunk and cabin are much roomier, making the car a more practical choice. The base five-cylinder engine is rated at 170 hp, and a 200-hp turbocharged four-cylinder and *140-hp diesel are available.*
> Bottom line
> 
> More space and power might breathe new life into the retro Beetle. *But lower-trim Beetles have rather cheap interior plastics*, examples of the cost-cutting strategy that hurt the 2011 Jetta (available to subscribers) sedan we tested.





CR said:


> Just in: 2012 Volkswagen Beetle
> Mar 19, 2012 3:30 PM
> 
> Back in 1998, when Volkswagen recast its iconic Beetle, it produced a caricature of the original--a car with modern technology, but having more style than substance that ended up appealing to drivers (mainly women) who put a premium on cuteness. A frequent question was whether the company could continue to keep such a design fresh.
> ...


 1. The Diesel is not available yet, especially when this article was written. 
2. Is the dash/ interior plastics really any better among the different trims? Is it like the GLI were it gets a soft touch dash? 
3. Really the turbo-charged model with more hp and torque is quicker? OH MY GOD As far as MPG goes I actually have seen the 2.5L gets a touch better gas mileage than the 2.0 TSI. 
4. Which Beetles have drum brakes? My base, literally no option Beetle 2.5L MT has rear discs.


----------



## TragicallyHip (Jan 25, 2011)

Aonarch said:


> 3. Really the turbo-charged model with more hp and torque is quicker? OH MY GOD As far as MPG goes I actually have seen the 2.5L gets a touch better gas mileage than the 2.0 TSI.


 Little gems like that are the reason I don't rely on CR for car info.  Not sure about the plastics. 



> 4. Which Beetles have drum brakes? My base, literally no option Beetle 2.5L MT has rear discs.


 If I recall there, was a "super base" version destined for rental fleets. If you look at the technical specs on the vw.com site, you will see that they have two separate "Service Brakes" sections, one saying rear disk, and one saying rear drum: 

Service Brakes Power assisted, dual circuit, vented 288 x 25 mm front discs and 230 x 32 mm rear drums 
Service Brakes Power assisted, dual circuit, vented 288 x 25 mm front discs and 272 x 10 mm solid rear discs


----------



## silverspeedbuggy (Aug 8, 2001)

TragicallyHip said:


> Little gems like that are the reason I don't rely on CR for car info.  Not sure about the plastics.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 This is getting strange. Yes, the 'ultra base' Beetle has rear drums, 16" wheels with full hubcaps, and a black dash board (vs. body color), and auto trans only (I think). So either they obtained some weird Frankenstein model pieced together from trim of several different models, or they rented a Beetle and used it for testing (and just referenced the differences like the chrome hubcaps). 

Stating the car had drum brakes when the actual model does not does call their credibility into question. 

Also, unlike 99% of all car makers, the 2.5L engine is not intended to be the fuel economy leader, it's the price leader of the model. The engine is cheaper to make so it keeps the cost low. The Turbo engine just happens to get better fuel economy and is more powerful. Average consumers expect the lower powered engine to get better mileage, but this isn't the case with this current round of engines. 

shgolden mentions the Beetle could not be recommended because the car slid before ESC kicked in. Could this be due to the drum brakes they mentioned? The same drum brakes that are NOT on any Beetle other than rental units? 

Here's a thread on the 'base' Beetle: 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...etle-16-quot-wheels-black-trim&highlight=BASE


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

I have the plastic mirror caps, door handles, side trim, and a black dash. 

I have already fixed all of that minus the dash, which I prefer. A body shop can professionally paint the trim for cheap. 

They claimed they bought the Beetle, but they never mentioned the price. My guess is they rented one or bought a rental car. :facepalm: 

They also claim the price of $20xxx. CR goes to dealers incognito and buys a car off the lot. This is what is really screwy. So they claim the Beetle that they bought for $20xxx has rear drums?


----------



## moodylucy (Aug 21, 2011)

As was said early in this thread, one buys a Beetle because of the love of the car, not for CR rating.


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

*FV-QR*

Can any turbo owner confirm that their dash is soft touch? If so are the door panels soft touch?


----------



## vdub10golf (Jan 23, 2010)

Aonarch said:


> Can any turbo owner confirm that their dash is soft touch? If so are the door panels soft touch?


 Mine doesn't have soft-touch. That's what I miss most from my MK6 Golf


----------



## TragicallyHip (Jan 25, 2011)

silverspeedbuggy said:


> the Beetle could not be recommended because the car slid before ESC kicked in. Could this be due to the drum brakes they mentioned? The same drum brakes that are NOT on any Beetle other than rental units?


 Could be. I can vouch for the fact that works on my turbo... Where I turn into my work there is a strange piece of asphalt - has a hump in the middle of an off-camber corner. Well, I took that a wee bit quickly the other day, and while I didn't feel that I was going to lose control, I did think "I should probably take this a bit more slowly tomorrow". At that moment, I felt one of the rear wheels brake and was firmly planted on the ground again.


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

vdub10golf said:


> Mine doesn't have soft-touch. That's what I miss most from my MK6 Golf


 I still have a MKVI Golf and yeah the interior quality isn't as good, but I like the design better. 



TragicallyHip said:


> Could be. I can vouch for the fact that works on my turbo... Where I turn into my work there is a strange piece of asphalt - has a hump in the middle of an off-camber corner. Well, I took that a wee bit quickly the other day, and while I didn't feel that I was going to lose control, I did think "I should probably take this a bit more slowly tomorrow". At that moment, I felt one of the rear wheels brake and was firmly planted on the ground again.


 So basically CR completely fails at life. 

My system works fine. I live at the "Tail of the Dragon" and I haven't had any problematic interference or lack of.


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

Here is proof that base consumer Beetles have rear drums. 

:laugh:


----------



## shgolden (Oct 29, 2003)

silverspeedbuggy said:


> Stating the car had drum brakes when the actual model does not does call their credibility into question.
> 
> shgolden mentions the Beetle could not be recommended because the car slid before ESC kicked in. Could this be due to the drum brakes they mentioned? The same drum brakes that are NOT on any Beetle other than rental units?


 I also doubt that CR's Beetle had rear drum brakes. In their full test report of the car in the current issue (July 2012), they rated the brakes as being very good "with short stops and linear pedal feel." Their tested model had 17" tires and body-colored dash, so it wasn't the "entry" model. 

The Beetle was not recommended by CR because of its low overall score in CR's tests, not just because its emergency handling wasn't so good. There wasn't a safety issue with the Beetle's handling in CR's tests, it just wasn't as good as its handling limits compared to its competition. Other lows mentioned by CR included wind noise, long clutch pedal travel, and not very good rear visibility.


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

shgolden said:


> I also doubt that CR's Beetle had rear drum brakes. In their full test report of the car in the current issue (July 2012), they rated the brakes as being very good "with short stops and linear pedal feel." Their tested model had 17" tires and body-colored dash, so it wasn't the "entry" model.
> 
> The Beetle was not recommended by CR because of its low overall score in CR's tests, not just because its emergency handling wasn't so good. There wasn't a safety issue with the Beetle's handling in CR's tests, it just wasn't as good as its handling limits compared to its competition. Other lows mentioned by CR included *wind noise, long clutch pedal travel, and not very good rear visibility.*


 1. Probably just a door out of alignment. 
2. It isn't a S2000, fine by me. 
3. Lol remove the rear headrests if you don't have passengers...


----------



## shgolden (Oct 29, 2003)

One last thing about CR's review of the Beetle, and then I'll shut up. CR's overall score of the Beetle was a 60 (out of 100), which puts it in CR's "good" category. They don't recommend it because its score is much lower than its competition. CR grouped the Beetle in its "sporty cars" category which includes the Mini Cooper, Hyundai Veloster, Scion tC, and Fiat 500. The highest rated car in this group is the Mini Cooper (base), with an overall score of 81. The Veloster was rated along with the Beetle in CR's current issue, and it received a 71. The Veloster scored high enough to be recommended, but CR needs to get reliability data from their annual survey of subscribers before they can recommend it. 

To put the Beetle's score of 60 in perspective, CR tested cars in their "subcompact hatchbacks with auto transmissions" group (in a previous issue), and the highest scoring car in that group was the Honda Fit (base), which received a 68. They recommended cars scoring less than that in that group, including the Scion xD which received a 60. The lowest scoring car in that group was a Toyota Yaris (LE) which got a 41. They didn't recommend the Yaris.


----------



## Sixtysomething (Aug 7, 2003)

It's quite surprising that they didn't recommend the Yaris, because it hails from the Land of the Rising Sun. After all, and even though the Beetle and that Scion had the same score, the Beetle was ignored. How convenient! But then again, to make it look like they are not as biased toward Japanese makes as they actually are, I guess CR had to pass on the Yaris. For otherwise, it would be too obvious...... 

In short, Consumer Reports doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground. They use very small sampling demographics to determine car reliability and assume that every car of a certain make will have the same issues that a few respondents reported. They also ignore the fact that those with few or no problems don't bother to take their surveys. I would guess that maybe 2-3% of a particular make of car owners even bother to fill out their questionairres. For one thing, you have to belong to the Consumer's Union. Then, if (what is it? 14%?) of that 2-3% have a common issue, it is automatically assumed that every car of that make across the board will likewise have the same problems, and so it gets a black mark. Even if this rang true, they further ignore the fact that this means that 86% of those cars would still be fine.


----------



## silverspeedbuggy (Aug 8, 2001)

It's also disappointing that they've rated the 2.5L but not the Turbo. Their handling and MPG complaints would be eliminated right there. I feel the Turbo is a completely different car from the 2.5 much in the same way the GTI is regarded as a completely seperate model. Imagine if CR used 2.5L Golf in their tests in place of a GTI. 

BUT I do admit I haven't seen the article, so perhaps they are reviewing the 2.5L as compared to other naturally aspirated cars. Was the MINI a base model or an S? The Veloster was the non-turbo model as the forced-induction model is not out yet.


----------



## GTarr (May 17, 2012)

Think I agree w/ SilverSpeed. If it was the "sporty cars" category, why the heck wouldn't they use the Turbo version? The 2.5L sounds like it would have fit in better in the "subcompact hatchbacks" category. That said, I'm not letting their "assessment" of the Beetle bother me - I :heart: mine! 

GTarr


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

GTarr said:


> Think I agree w/ SilverSpeed. If it was the "sporty cars" category, why the heck wouldn't they use the Turbo version? The 2.5L sounds like it would have fit in better in the "subcompact hatchbacks" category. That said, I'm not letting their "assessment" of the Beetle bother me - I :heart: mine!
> 
> GTarr


 :thumbup:


----------



## katie78 (Oct 25, 2011)

I test drove a fully loaded Veloster and both the 2.5 and the Turbo Beetle. I thought the Veloster felt much cheaper on the inside and didn't handle as well. The price point and gas mileage is certainly much nicer on the Veloster, even fully loaded. In the end, the Beetle felt like a more stable car and more attuned to what I wanted in a vehicle. Consumer Reports can suck it.


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

katie78 said:


> I test drove a fully loaded Veloster and both the 2.5 and the Turbo Beetle. I thought the Veloster felt much cheaper on the inside and didn't handle as well. The price point and gas mileage is certainly much nicer on the Veloster, even fully loaded. In the end, the Beetle felt like a more stable car and more attuned to what I wanted in a vehicle. Consumer Reports can suck it.


 Hyundai's are usually over rated for EPA.


----------



## Cadenza_7o (Jan 23, 2001)

CR consistently rated the NB at the bottom among against the competition, particularly on reliability. 

I just came back from a 1600mi trip and my '01 has 202,5xx miles. 

Oh wait... the CEL just lit up to make CR happy.


----------



## shgolden (Oct 29, 2003)

Cadenza_7o said:


> CR consistently rated the NB at the bottom among against the competition, particularly on reliability.
> 
> I just came back from a 1600mi trip and my '01 has 202,5xx miles.
> 
> Oh wait... the CEL just lit up to make CR happy.


 Nope. CR scored the NB very high went it first came out. It wasn't recommended because it had below average reliability from CR's survey through the years. 

As to others who keep saying that CR has always hated VWs, the B5 Passat was always rated very high by CR through its lifetime. It outscored the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry consistently. The Passat V6 was recommended by CR, but not the 1.8T due to its below average reliability scores. 

As to others who wonder why the 2.5L Beetle was tested in their "sporty cars" category instead of the 2.0T, the category was just sporty 2-door cars. The highly scoring Mini was the base version, not the turbo. There were only five cars in the category: MINI base, Veloster, Scion tC, Fiat 500, and the Beetle, all with their base engines. 

Oh, CR does recommend the Golf 2.5L. It didn't score as high as the Golf TDI, but it still scored very well, and its reliability in CR's survey was better than average. 

I don't agree with CR's score of the 2011 Jetta SE. I think they just scored it pretty low because they didn't like the cost-cutting they saw. It was the same with the Civic. They scored it very low for the same reason. They tested the high mileage Civic HF (in the latest issue) and bashed it some more (scored it a 61). Same with the 2012 Nissan Versa sedan in a previous isse. It scored a 53. As to the 2011 Jetta, they did mention that other trim lines (TDI, GLI) should be much better than the one they did test, but they haven't done a full test on the other Jettas. 

Now, I'll try to shut up again, unless someone posts other things on this that are just wrong.


----------



## Cadenza_7o (Jan 23, 2001)

I didn't follow CR in 98 when the NB was released. By 2001 when mine was purchased, looking at CR scoring of the NB was depressing. Didn't care much though since I had a decent idea of the weaknesses of the power and drivetrain. 

I also have the '06 Mini Cooper S with 41k... so far it has more warranty repair than my 202k NB, just little things though. 

You're correct that CR recommended the B5 Passat. 

Does CR have recommendations for shirt pocket protectors?


----------



## Sixtysomething (Aug 7, 2003)

CR may rate some Volkswagens' handling or fit and finish highly, but the Average Joe/Josephine doesn't look at that. They look at reliability. That is what counts the most. And that is where CR consistently praises Japanese cars and bashes VW (in most cases). In that respect, they can indeed suck it. 

Worse yet, you have JD Powers. They have this ranking based on "problems per 100 cars." Here's an example of how JDP is set up: 

Lets suppose over a 5-year period, Car A blows a head gasket. 
Now, let's suppose during that same amount of time, a Volkswagen will have a burned out headlight and a power window switch go out. 

Therefore, according to JDP, VWs are twice as problematic as Car A!


----------



## Aonarch (Dec 4, 2006)

fiftysomething said:


> CR may rate some Volkswagens' handling or fit and finish highly, but the Average Joe/Josephine doesn't look at that. They look at reliability. That is what counts the most. And that is where CR consistently praises Japanese cars and bashes VW (in most cases). In that respect, they can indeed suck it.
> 
> Worse yet, you have JD Powers. They have this ranking based on "problems per 100 cars." Here's an example of how JDP is set up:
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: 

I already am getting some trim pieces replaced, window motors, and a side mirror. It is all minor stuff though, so whatever, but in JD Power's mind that is the most unreliable POS on the earth.


----------



## Farnsworth (Jan 26, 2010)

CR is :bs: 

The best cars I've ever owned (VW and Audi) = bashed by CR.

The worst cars I've ever owned (Japanese and GM) = loved by CR.


----------



## jpitzer4 (Jul 18, 2012)

*Nothing*

I do not buy anything CR recommends, from a toaster oven to a car, they are just like movie critics.


----------



## Babie (Jul 22, 2012)

silverspeedbuggy said:


> CR has never been a VW fan.


You can say that again.

I have always felt that these magazines are all bias. Or their palms are itchy and not scratched enough.

the larges POS I have ever own was the Scion XB 2nd edition. It had serious weld issues. AND CR said one of the best cars ever made. Pony POOP. 

My best car was an A4 i had for one summer. my dads


----------



## VR6Now (Dec 31, 2000)

I like VWs and Audis. I've had atleast two of them at any given time over the course of 13+ years. That being said, I think the criticism they get is well deserved and not the result of bias.

Regardless of my anodotal experience with them or yours. Independent of your experience with other brands, VWs are usually priced above competitive models and cost more to own over these same vehicles. This additional cost does not appear to come with increased reliability. VW has earned a reputation and the only way they can shed it is to reduce thier warranty cost (improve the quality) I continue to buy them currently but I *never* recommend them to friends and collegues who have high expectations for trouble-free driving.

I'm not impressed with CR but I think VW's products have earned themselves a certain visibility in thier eyes.


----------



## Cadenza_7o (Jan 23, 2001)

VR6Now said:


> I like VWs and Audis. I've had atleast two of them at any given time over the course of 13+ years. That being said, I think the criticism they get is well deserved and not the result of bias.
> 
> Regardless of my anodotal experience with them or yours. Independent of your experience with other brands, VWs are usually priced above competitive models and cost more to own over these same vehicles. This additional cost does not appear to come with increased reliability. VW has earned a reputation and the only way they can shed it is to reduce thier warranty cost (improve the quality) *I continue to buy them currently but I never recommend them to friends and collegues who have high expectations for trouble-free driving.*
> 
> I'm not impressed with CR but I think VW's products have earned themselves a certain visibility in thier eyes.


Same here... I wouldn't recommend VW/Audis or most European brands to relatives and friends who've mostly had Japanese cars. Most of my relatives who drive German cars lease them instead of buying. Those with MB/BMW/Audis might have less nagging issues but their maintenance/repair bills are much higher than VWs. One cousin who bought a late '90s MB E420 said it's his worst car ownership experience. It doesn't get driven much because he's scared silly of the repair bills but won't let it go because he's the brand worshipper. Another relative who recently bought his first MB ('10 E350) loaded up on extended warranties just in case... the jury is still out on that one. 

Personally, I've been lucky with my current '01 NB 1.8T (205k) and had over 300k on a '81 Audi 4000. I've kept the cost of ownership low by learning to maintain and fix things myself and buying late in each generation. To date my 11.75yr/205k old NB has cost only $6900 for maintenance, repair, wear-n-tear or $587/yr. Not bad considering it gets on average 17,500mi per year. And AFAIK, my Mexican taped-together NB is the only car that's gone over 200k in the clan.


----------



## VR6Now (Dec 31, 2000)

I had a 2001 VW Beetle TDI that I kick myself a little every day for unloading. No issues with cam wear, (1.9 PD 2005-2006 MK5) or HPFPs (2.0 CR 2009+). It doesn't seem like VW knows what its doing with the current diesels. At least the Passat TDI seems ok right now.

VW isn't a victim of bias. With window regulator issues (MK4 & B5 A4), FSI oil consumption issues, 1.8T premature timing belt failures, TSI intake manifold flapper & chain tensioner issues, DSG failures, DMF problems, and the current Beetles window problem, they have to a certain extent made their own bed. Even the 2012 Golf R has been experiencing a water pump failure which take the whole engine out. It's in small numbers thus far but a water pump should not typically result in a new engine but it does in this case.


----------



## Katmandu (May 26, 2004)

katie78 said:


> I test drove a fully loaded Veloster and both the 2.5 and the Turbo Beetle.
> 
> I thought the Veloster felt much cheaper on the inside and didn't handle as well. The price point and gas mileage is certainly much nicer on the Veloster, even fully loaded.
> 
> In the end, the Beetle felt like a more stable car and more attuned to what I wanted in a vehicle. Consumer Reports can suck it.


x2. I too recently test drove a Veloster and a 2012 Base Beetle w/2.5 auto. 

The Veloster is a severely under powered cheap roller skate. The Beetle is much more solid, comfortable and capable cruiser. A corner cutter road burner it is not, but would make a fine commuter car (which I'm considering buying). A local dealer is offering $2000 OFF all Beetles currently. Very enticing to say the least!


----------



## LEBlackRob (Feb 1, 2012)

Lol after reading all of it must say who cares. It seems like it has been for ever that consumer reports have been out. I feel that it is a nice way to do some looking into things, but most of there time the articles are very lame. As in the fact that they bash things with little to no knowledge and rarely state facts correctly. It would be like going to a middle school bus driver and asking him what laptop to buy. If you need to see what people have noticed that have owned the car this is a great tool to get idea's on things. I mean come on we all have are own personal taste and will choose to like or hate things all on are own. Consumer reports have bashed things that I have liked in the past. So just move on with life and laugh at the fact that they think there car had drum rear brakes. I have access to ETKA and there is only one option for rear brake on the Beetle for US models and that is Bosch rear disc's.


----------



## Herbie3Rivers (Apr 12, 2003)

I don't trust anything consumer reports says. Never have, never will. I've found that their reports tend to be biased.


----------



## Babie (Jul 22, 2012)

Katmandu said:


> x2. I too recently test drove a Veloster and a 2012 Base Beetle w/2.5 auto.
> 
> The Veloster is a severely under powered cheap roller skate. The Beetle is much more solid, comfortable and capable cruiser. A corner cutter road burner it is not, but would make a fine commuter car (which I'm considering buying). A local dealer is offering $2000 OFF all Beetles currently. Very enticing to say the least!


 The Veloster is so cheap, FLASH BUT TRASH.


----------



## kballard72 (Jul 2, 2012)

*Versa is not good...*

Oh the Versa flat out sucks. Really sucks. had if for a day while my bug was stopping in the dealership to say "hello". Nothing wrong with it, we just visit for fun occasionally so the service department has something to do... They gave me a rental and it was the versa... Wow, plastic clatters in my bug? compared to the versa I drive a library... 

The problem with a lot of these reviews by the PROS is like a movie critic. They review every movie like its going to be an oscar contender, instead of just a fun outlet. CR and others do the same as if every car made is trying to get car of the year.


----------



## LEBlackRob (Feb 1, 2012)

kballard72 said:


> Oh the Versa flat out sucks. Really sucks. had if for a day while my bug was stopping in the dealership to say "hello". Nothing wrong with it, we just visit for fun occasionally so the service department has something to do... They gave me a rental and it was the versa... Wow, plastic clatters in my bug? compared to the versa I drive a library...
> 
> The problem with a lot of these reviews by the PROS is like a movie critic. They review every movie like its going to be an oscar contender, instead of just a fun outlet. CR and others do the same as if every car made is trying to get car of the year.


 Coming form my salesmen days. I think that most of the reviewer stuff is a nice tool. Just you can't take it and think you will find all your answers there. I sold VW, Chevy, Hyundia, and Subaru's. In the short time that I worked at a dealer. Won't lie my blood is blue and I am a diehard VW guy, but trust me it was always fun to deal with a know it all. We would get these guys that would live by the research they found on the internet. Until you got them in the car. Now I am going to give you an example, I don't dislike Subaru actually my mom and dad love the company. Consumer reports almost always puts Subaru as one of the best buys. We would have people come in telling us how great they are and you would get them in the car and it was like this is cheap inside. They are great cars they have an amazing AWD system and no one is near there price range with AWD commuter cars but they have to cut the corner some ware unfortunately it is in the interior quality. I had so many customer that would drive an Impreza and a Jetta and leave with a Jetta, or Legacy and CC and leave with a CC. So keep in mind the "Butt" test is always going to be your deciding point just don't show the salesmen all your cards at once.


----------



## kballard72 (Jul 2, 2012)

LEBlackRob said:


> the "Butt" test is always going to be your deciding point


 Another idea I read, go test drive a used car of whatever model you are looking at New, with at least a few thousand miles. 

Go drive one that has 4 or 5000 miles on it and see what things are like in a vehicle after some road wear. Most cars are awesome at 000000 and may not be at 005000 or 020000 on the odometer. 

Not as easy with a bug, not so many used ones available.


----------



## zsqure (May 1, 2012)

CR has got to be the best sham out there, produce a periodical where everyone will buy it based upon the title. They say nothing of value in that thing.


----------



## LEBlackRob (Feb 1, 2012)

zsqure said:


> CR has got to be the best sham out there, produce a periodical where everyone will buy it based upon the title. They say nothing of value in that thing.


I was just looking at some car things and stumbled onto this. Now I know this thread has died down but felt that would shed some light on how crappy consumer report is. This shows there bias towards cars. Vanity fare went out and asked editors from big named automotive magazines and online blogs what car would they buy for 100k. Now don't get me wrong this list is lame but look at what mister consumer reports picks. Also to top it off he pick none turbo. All info below and link to page.

"Jake Fisher of Consumer Reports picked the Hyundai Veloster"

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/09/29/vanity-fair-asks-auto-writers-what-car-theyd-buy-for-10/


----------



## gsprobe (Jan 29, 2006)

kballard72 said:


> Another idea I read, go test drive a used car of whatever model you are looking at New, with at least a few thousand miles.
> 
> Go drive one that has 4 or 5000 miles on it and see what things are like in a vehicle after some road wear. Most cars are awesome at 000000 and may not be at 005000 or 020000 on the odometer.
> 
> Not as easy with a bug, not so many used ones available.


This is very important. A brand new Dodge Neon seemed nicer than a new VW Jetta if you think about it. All cars are nice when new.


----------



## LEBlackRob (Feb 1, 2012)

gsprobe said:


> This is very important. A brand new Dodge Neon seemed nicer than a new VW Jetta if you think about it. All cars are nice when new.


The fact that you compare a Neon to a Volkswagen is messed up man. That car was like an abortion of the worst from Japan pared with the dumbest of American idea's. With a little Daewoo to top it off.


----------

