Consumer Reports = toilet paper in a pinch. That's about it.

Consumer Reports is biased IMO. They rate cars based on certain categories and only some of the categories do tell relevant information. They are not really the best source of telling us what new cars are the ones we should buy.

Whoever paid the most money got the highest rating.

I trust guys like Scotty, CarWizard, and the prominent fellows in this forum.  

I don’t trust Consumer Reports and J.D. Power and Associates.

Maybe you should ask us about our opinion of Consumer Reports themselves.

https://carkiller.com/scottykilmer/?wpfs=consumer+reports&wpfin=tag&wpfd=0&wpfob=relevancy&wpfo=desc

I've never paid much attention to Consumer reports ratings of cars. Although a very long time ago it was pretty funny when CR top-rated the Fiat 128 only to have many of their loyal readers buy them and experience the cars quickly falling apart, with spotty parts availability and disappearing dealers the icing on the cake.

RIP to our members who log in here from their mobile phone..

Almost thirty years ago, I sold Rainbow vacuum cleaners. I did it because they were flat out awesome, and they used water as a filter, the only one in the business.

Consumer reports did a review of numerous vacuum cleaners, and rated rainbow the lowest because they said it did the worst at picking up dirt. What they did was, weigh the vacuum first, then pick up a bunch of the test material, and weigh it after.

They were actually using talcom powder instead of dirt for the test. Very odd choice as I don't know many people that have talcom powder in their carpet. Although it is one of the few substances that does not adhere to water, so when the rainbow sucks it up, it spits it right back out into the air because it doesn't stick, and the rainbow weighed the same, and so they claimed it hadn't picked up anything.

Consumer reports was sued for that, and they lost. As others have stated, they are obviously paid to slant their ratings to whoever pays them the most.