Best sources of unbiased auto information

[LouDawg]

What are some of the least biased and most comprehensive, trusted, and professional sources of automotive information that you read or reference? Like in such areas as:

* new and used car reviews
* quality
* reliability
* performance
* technical details
* maintenance and mechanical information
* customer satisfaction
* etc.

I already subscribe to CR, and I've looked at a lot of other publications and online resources. But I'm always asking what angles they may have, conflicts of interest, or just downright shoddy or unscrupulous methods.

Of course besides BITOG!

 

[rpn453]

I regularly read Car and Driver and The Truth About Cars. They don't keep their criticisms quiet.

 

[benjamming]

I also read C&D online. Sometimes criticisms aren't kept quiet to simply sell more or get more hits. It becomes a marketing tool & becomes overrun with bad analogies, etc.

Car specific forums can also be a good source if you can wade through the fecal matter that folks leave (which you shouldn't have a problem with).

 

[97tbird]

BITOG

 

[Quest]

SAE

 

[Lonnie]

It takes a lot of work to dig the truth out of any car related information.

 

[Jaybird]

I agree with Quest.
Marketing rules ALL of the marketed publications. Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise. The are all marketing product, and have a bias to their advertizers that is inherant.

The SAE is marketing knowledge.

 

[Quest]

SAE is not just marketing knowledge, but the basis/foundation where automotive engineering works are pretty much based on.

Autmotive engineering is no longer a backyard science/black art, IMHO but a science/engineering subject that requires a lot of discipline and advanced knowledge, and lots of "brainic" to work on together.

 

[FloatingBrick]

What Lonnie said.

Not an answer, but related - I used to read Consumer Reports, Road & Track, Car & Driver, Motor Trend, and annual new car reviews.

In 1989, being short on cash (grad student) but needing a car, I decided to finance a new one. Limited by my price range, I decided on a Pontiac LeMans. The consensus in most of the magazines was that it was a horrible car. After driving a 2.0L/5 speed version, I decided that it was fun to drive and I liked the looks.

I only had one severe issue (within a month of purchase) with that car in the 11 years I owned it. It took 2 weeks to ship an alternator from Korea to the dealer. I maintained it well and sold it with 160k running like new.

My point - "facts" are hard to come by. Sure, we can get hp ratings, skip pad results, and braking distances, but driving impressions are what matters and are completely subjective. When I was younger, I was more interested in looking cool than in drive quality or gas mileage. Now I like reliability and safety.

I still read the car magazines sometimes and rely on specific car forums for details. Once I get a feel for what I want, I then check out the possibilities for myself.

 

[onion]

I quite reading CR when they gave a car low marks for having low headrests and interior that looked "dated". That's just silly- and pretty ____ irrelevent to me.

 

[JHZR2]

I don't trust CR, or most other magazines. What Ive found is that they are too hit or miss, and many of their determinations are not actually correct in my experiences.

For reading about how a car felels, drives, etc., I like motor trend and consumer reports. But, I only would use them to determine the basics on how things operate, feel, and go, not on which is best, most reliable, etc. And, I think that that is the point - use whatever magazine you like, has the review for the cars youre interested and catch your eye, etc, but use it only to know what to look for and to get a basic understanding of what the vehicles are like, and how they might be compared to others that may be on your list...

I think these days it is too hard to compare reliability of different vehicles. We had a pretty lousy toyota, and yet my saab has been completely problem-free.

JMH

 

[benjamming]

But a mag like CR & website like truedelta has more than a data point of 1 that JHZR2 & Lonnie talked about. It merely improves my odds. I like improving my odds if even a fraction.

 

[Black Bart]

I stopped reading magazines like R&T and C&D because they think that everyone wants a race car.
While I own a Corvette and enjoy driving it if that was the only car that I could afford I would trade it on something more practical.
While I enjoy a great handling car for a daily diver their are other things to consider.
Those Mags will complain that the suspension is too soft but that is what a lot of people want for their DD.
While it will require a lot of effort on your part instead of buying what someone else thinks is great I would suggest that you do the test drive buy what you want in a car.
I read posts on this site about some vehicles that they think needs updated or needs this or that and while a lot of times I Don't agree with what is being said I stay out of it because the bottom line is they will keep thinking what they do and I will keep thinking what I do so it is pointless to argue about it.
I buy what I want and if the magazines or people on a forum don't agree thats OK by me just as long as I'm happy with it.
I will not allow someone working for a mag to pick my vehicles.

 

[1sttruck]

Mass market publications are intended for mass markets. If your vehicle needs are typical then just plan on spending some time checking them out to narrow your choices, where you'll probably end up with several vehicles that aren't that much different from another. None of the publications hire pychics who can accurately predict reliability on new models, and each of magazines seems to blow it once in awhile by recommending vehicles that have ended up with problems. You also need to careful about terms like 'reliability' which is rattle surveys on new vehicles to some, guesses by others, and different from durability which doesn't seem to be considered by anyone.

I didn't find any publications recommending the vehicle that I ended up with, so don't assume that others know what's best for you. Some of the online forums provided a reality check once I was 'outside of the box'.

 

[LouDawg]

I guess the crux of the problem is knowing whom to trust. I guess my philosophy now is kind of like this: if I read multiple publications, journals, reviews, and even forums, and they are all pretty consistent about a particular vehicle, then to me that's a pretty good indicator of the probabilities of how that vehicle will perform in terms of whatever the similarities are. Conversely, if the opinions are all over the board, I take all of them with a grain of salt.

Of course "probabilities" do not equal "absolutes", and there are certainly no guarantees either way. I just like to go with the odds as far as the features that are most important to me.

 

[Mr Nice]

Epinions.com

from car owners who actually drive & own the car they are reviewing, not some editor from a big name car magazine that only drove the brand new car for a few days.

 

[obbop]

Reliability......

One good source for a make/model that's been around awhile....

Used auto part sellers... the wrecking yard.

Slip the dude a 5 or 10 and ask about a couple models.

Go to a high-class yard with a computerized interchange/inventory set-up.

Learn of weak points.

I did it with a 1991 Toyota Previa back in 1999. Went to the yard I used to work at. They let me access the computer.

Transmissions and engines did not sell. Lots in stock. Prices reduced regularly as time passed but, no demand.

What did sell was the wiper transmission since it was so big and folks used wipers to scrape off snow vice doing it by hand.

Also selling were parts for the sliding side door. Those wear out.

Looking at the data I determined the Previa was a reliable vehicle.

If a make/model regularly sells a major component, that can be a warning.

I have NEVER read anywhere of using the computerized database ( and/or the part salesperson's personal knowledge) at wrecking yards to assist in determining vehicle reliabilty regarding the components of the vehicle.

Of course, it does take a little time for trouble-prone parts to make themselves known, but, for vehicles selling in quantity, not all that long.

You have to determine if the vehicle you are looking at has the same components(s) as prior years but the computerized interchange can assist in this determination.

A vehicle can be redesigned with one or more new components, making past reliability history null for your use.