Consumer Reports Recommends The Taurus X and Tribeca Over Toyota's New Highlander

Doesnt surprize me. Ford is more reliable then Toyota these days.

Of course 009 knew what he was doing with this headline. It is intentionally flame baiting. The article states that the Highlander "is now the highest-scoring midsized three-row SUV in our Ratings." Rock on 009, this is why we luv ya.

Tribeca is better because it has a boxer engine and the engine is oriented North-South instead of East-West which avoids some right-angle coupling. The Tribeca and Highlander have a common flaw however in that the spare is mounted exposed underneath the vehicle instead of in a proper wheel well inside the vehicle.

009, you need to correct the typo in the article title.

"But because we recommend only models with sufficient data to predict average or better reliability, only the Taurus X and Tribeca are recommended from this group. Like the Highlander, we have no reliability data yet on the new Enclave."

He's an ass - it wasnt a typo, he knew what he was doing.

no, consumer reports is a wonderful resource for assessing reliability. particularly with appliances, various services and electronics. commoditized items.

however, it is not an authority on cars beyond reliability. consumer reports would happily give up performance, luxury, style and handling for a bit more reliability. that may be favorable to toyota/lexus buyers who prioritize reliability over everything. but not for those of us who enjoy great looking, fun-to-drive cars.

"great looking"
(Subjective)

"fun-to-drive"
You wouldn't drive it unless it was made in Germany anywway, so shut up.

enthusiast:
"however, it is not an authority on cars beyond reliability. consumer reports would happily give up performance, luxury, style and handling for a bit more reliability. that may be favorable to toyota/lexus buyers who prioritize reliability over everything. but not for those of us who enjoy great looking, fun-to-drive cars."


what a bunch of crap! aside from the evaluation of style (which is objective and impossible to quantify), CR does the MOST COMPREHENSIVE car testing and evaluations.

what other reviewer BUYS all their test vehicles (anonymously so as not be slipped a ringer), owns their own DEDICATED test track, does full break-ins prior to tests, actually employs auto ENGINEERS in the test team (vs. opinionated scribes), etc. etc.?

if their drivers' reports do not RAVE about handling, it is only because they have a more mature, restrained reporting style. (they still DO refer to "responsive" and "sporting" handling characteristics. and make instrumented MEASUREMENTS.)

finally, they give numeric scores to all vehicles road tested, that ARE NOT fudged by factors like price, "STYLE," etc., like the enthusiast magazines.

most of the critics of CR accuse them of "not knowing" what "real enthusiasts" prefer, ONLY BECAUSE their personal favorites may NOT be rated highly by CR, who offers the MOST COMPREHENSIVE and OBJECTIVE testing and ratings.

their RELIABILITY ratings are an EXTRA bonus. again, more comprehensive than anyone else's, including JDP.

the quality and comprehensiveness of the CR reliability studies are such that most are not even AWARE of CR's road test work.

correction: ...style (which is SUBjective and impossible to quantify),

I rented a highlander in florida two weeks ago. Its an extremely functional vehicle, but the inside was cheap. The gauges and center stack had no flowing theme to it. It was fairly peppy, but the handiling was numb and the steering felt very assisted. I think its great alternative to a minivan but I happen to like Acadia better.

I dare anyone to sit on the 3rd row and tell me the seatback is comfortable. Try it and you will understand what I mean. The 3rd row in Highlander is the very worst I have seen so far in all SUV/CUV with 3rd row seat. In autoshow, everyone was laughing st it (the seatback).