April "Consumer Reports" says '16 is a "worst" buy!

[PMCErnie]

Wow, that ain't good.

 

[Mark_888]

I assume they are talking about anticipated depreciation?

 

[Markr]

I assume they are talking about anticipated depreciation?

That would make it a "best buy" for folks buying used cars!

 

[Ragnar]

I'd read a few other publications dedicated to autos before believiing everything in that money Hungary rag😝 my wife and I bought a 16' ultimate and so far couldn't be happier,ya paid a pretty penny for her but feel so far money well spent!
As I said time and again check the service areas of any dealership and see if their techs are just standing around drinking coffee!!😂

 

[AustinTX]

I'd read a few other publications dedicated to autos before believiing everything in that money Hungary rag�� my wife and I bought a 16' ultimate and so far couldn't be happier,ya paid a pretty penny for her but feel so far money well spent!
As I said time and again check the service areas of any dealership and see if their techs are just standing around drinking coffee!!��

I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean: "money Hungary rag" - Hungary is a country in Central Europe - I don't think they have anything to do with making Hyundai or Genesis cars. Maybe you meant to say "money hungry rag" - as in "a newspaper, typically one regarded as being of low quality, that will do anything for money." To that I respond that Consumer Reports, unlike any other magazine in the US I know about - doesn't accept advertising dollars of any kind, and doesn't accept free products for testing. Unlike any other car centered publication, they purchase and test cars independently. No fancy trips to exotic locations where you get a fully equipped and expert prepared press test vehicle to drive through Southern Spain, Northern Italy or on some fancy track in Germany for "testing". No free Porsche's, Ferrari's and Lamborghini's for "ultimate track test" articles. Consumer Reports is financed through subscriptions and donations - not by the car manufacturers, suppliers and other businesses that advertise and supply free vehicles and trips that directly benefit through the "reporting" and "reviews" in car magazines.

I suggest you read the information here http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/about-us/index.htm and then get a subscription to Consumer Reports to support their efforts to provide unbiased information to consumers. The "publications dedicated to autos" you mentioned are the ones you should rightly be suspicious of.

My 2015 "Ultimate" has been the worst car I have ever owned (well documented elsewhere here), and Hyundai just tells me my issues are "normal". If you deny that problems exist, your techs can just "stand around and drink coffee" instead of fixing ongoing and recurring issues on the vehicles.

 

[balfor]

What is their definition of "worst" buy, reliability or total ownership costs? I would dispute their findings either way as several independent sources have found the genesis is likely "good" in reliability overall. As far as depreciation, you have to look at average transaction costs and not percent off MSRP as many members report a larger discount than Lexus would give on a GS for example.

They heyday of Consumer Reports was the late 1980's before the internet came along. Back then, you had basically no way to get unbiased feedback on a product other than the off chance you might know someone with a similar product. Now, with so many sources and forums to get empirical data, the days of the paid subscription model with no ads is numbered.

 

[jmilr]

Clearly each individual will have their own experience; my 2015 3.8 AWD Ultimate has and continues to be one of the best cars I have ever owned. My previous car was a 2011 Infiniti FX-50...

Why you had to lead off with a comment about "Hungary", that looks to me to be a simple typo is odd and just a little demeaning... What are you driving now?

 

[lykbutta]

What problems do you have with your Genny? I copped a 2015 with tech package about 6 months ago. Anything I should look out for ?

 

[mjbuck]

Re: April "Consumer Reports" says '16 is a "worst" buy!

Great post about Consumer Reports. I have been a subscribing member of the magazine and now on-line for at least 22 years. There is a wealth of good information that they provide on every major purchase I make. I don't use them as the sole reason to buy this brand or that, but they weigh heavy on my decision. To criticize the magazine without knowing what it is about is wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

My post above this one was directed as a response to AUSTIN TX's post above. It is meant to be positive to what he posted. For some reason, computer or this site is leaving out stuff as I post. Just wanted to clarify where I was going with my comment.

 

[tuckerdog1]

Re: April "Consumer Reports" says '16 is a "worst" buy!

I thought the 2015s & 2016s ( and for the most part, the 2017s ) were pretty much the same car. So why the ratings differences in some areas?
Most areas were rated as excellent for both model years, with the following exceptions:
.........................2015.............2016
Climate System...Good.............Poor
Brakes................Excellent.......Below Average
Paint/Trim...........Good............Excellent
Body Integrity......Average........Below Average
Suspension..........Good............Excellent
Power Equipment.Good............Excellent
Audio System......Poor..............Poor

In 17 areas, the 2015 had 11 excellent, 4 above average ( good ), 1 average & 1 poor. The overall reliability rating was average.
The 2016 had 13 excellent, 2 below average & 2 poor. The overall reliability rating given was poor.

Seems a tad harsh. And odd since basically the same car.

Tuckerdog1

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[jrhodes87]

From what I've come to learn over the past couple of years from other car forums, no one listens to Consumer Reports anymore.

 

[AustinTX]

Re: April "Consumer Reports" says '16 is a "worst" buy!

They heyday of Consumer Reports was the late 1980's before the internet came along. Back then, you had basically no way to get unbiased feedback on a product other than the off chance you might know someone with a similar product. Now, with so many sources and forums to get empirical data, the days of the paid subscription model with no ads is numbered.

Consumer Reports continues to be a verifiably independent publication - the problem with the "unbiased feedback" from "many sources and forums to get empirical data" is that marketing companies have latched onto the notion that this is unbiased, and created a huge amount of verifiably bogus reviews on Amazon, as well as many other websites and blogs. Fake Amazon accounts leaving positive product reviews en masse, blog posters that are sponsored by companies (without disclosing that fact), reviews of "free products in return for an unbiased review" - there is plenty of proof that companies have understood the value of creating positive and supposedly unbiased reviews. Amazon has sued companies that provide fake positive product reviews as a service for a fee. There are marketing companies that seek out popular bloggers and pay them for product placement and positive mentions of their clients products. There are now websites that will find fake product reviews for you (http://www.fakespot.com, but paid bloggers are much harder to detect.

In conclusion, I disagree with you notion that the web provides "unbiased feedback" from "many sources and forums to get empirical data". I trust the experts at Consumer Reports more than some random, non-expert, and possibly paid anonymous reviewers on the Web.

Clearly each individual will have their own experience; my 2015 3.8 AWD Ultimate has and continues to be one of the best cars I have ever owned. My previous car was a 2011 Infiniti FX-50...

Why you had to lead off with a comment about "Hungary", that looks to me to be a simple typo is odd and just a little demeaning... What are you driving now?

The Hungary comment was as demeaning as the comment about Consumer Reports - and unnecessary - thanks for pointing that out (honestly!). I unfortunately still have my Genesis, as it is a 3 year lease, and I still have almost 2 years left. Biggest regret I ever had getting a car, and I did a ton of research and several test drives.

What problems do you have with your Genny? I copped a 2015 with tech package about 6 months ago. Anything I should look out for ?

Severe vibration issues, both when driving and at idle.

The vibration when driving is so bad that my hands go number on the steering wheel after a while - doesn't happen in any other car I have ever driven, including badly maintained rental cars. I got a set of brand new tires (from Hyundai, at no charge to me) on all wheels, plus an expert balancing done by a Hyundai engineer that visited the dealership for this issue, which fixed the problem for about 100 miles, but it gets worse every day.

Vibration at idle feels like someone put a magic wand under the seat. Everyone who rides in my car notices, including Hyundai dealer service personnel and Hyundai employees that I have met at the dealership service department (at my request). In the end, they tried to fix it, couldn't and now claim this is "normal". On a $50,000 supposed "luxury" vehicle.

I thought the 2015s & 2016s ( and for the most part, the 2017s ) were pretty much the same car. So why the ratings differences in some areas?
Most areas were rated as excellent for both model years, with the following exceptions:
.........................2015.............2016
Climate System...Good.............Poor
Brakes................Excellent.......Below Average
Paint/Trim...........Good............Excellent
Body Integrity......Average........Below Average
Suspension..........Good............Excellent
Power Equipment.Good............Excellent
Audio System......Poor..............Poor

In 17 areas, the 2015 had 11 excellent, 4 above average ( good ), 1 average & 1 poor. The overall reliability rating was average.
The 2016 had 13 excellent, 2 below average & 2 poor. The overall reliability rating given was poor.

Seems a tad harsh. And odd since basically the same car.

Tuckerdog1

I agree, and some of these ratings make little sense (do that many Audio Systems fail or have issues?) - and I assume they come from a low amount of responses (which exaggerates outliers) and from binning different things into broader categories - maybe Audio equipment includes navigation and other features. And brakes going from "Excellent" to "Below Average" raises questions too.

But, their ratings are based on statistical data provided by owners of these vehicles, surveys second in size only to the U.S. census.



My overall point made in response to Ragnar (good Viking name!) stands - from a bias perspective, Consumer Reports is clearly a more unbiased publication than any car magazine or blog.

 

[lobsenza]

I use Consumer Reports as a data point. However, I have found errors and disagree with their assessments many times. The 2015s and 2016s are basically the same car. Given that the 2016 is the second model year, it sould be the same or better than the 2015. It is very hard to believe that the results are that inconsistent. I have seen that before. I have seen them give completely different ratings to a Buick and Chevrolet that are almost the identical vehicle built on the same assembly line. It never hurst to look at their data, but take it with a grain of salt.

 

[chris41]

I like CR and consumer reviews on Edmunds. CR often contradicts themselves by stating reliability "worse than average", but the individual ratings can get almost all "excellent". They like to point out quirky things you might find a bit unusual the first few times in the car, but becomes the norm after driving for a week or so. They drool over Toyota and Honda which tells me exactly they type of person reviewing cars. Does anybody else always find themselves behind a Camry or Corolla driving "safe" and slow in the left lane??? At least the Civic types like to pretend they drive a rocket from Fast & Furious.....

 

[Man of Mystery]

I haven't looked at Consumer Reports in a long time.

I'm wondering if they have lumped the Genesis Sedan and Coupe into one category?

 

[amkorp]

Re: April "Consumer Reports" says '16 is a "worst" buy!

I thought the 2015s & 2016s ( and for the most part, the 2017s ) were pretty much the same car. So why the ratings differences in some areas?
Most areas were rated as excellent for both model years, with the following exceptions:
.........................2015.............2016
Climate System...Good.............Poor
Brakes................Excellent.......Below Average
Paint/Trim...........Good............Excellent
Body Integrity......Average........Below Average
Suspension..........Good............Excellent
Power Equipment.Good............Excellent
Audio System......Poor..............Poor

In 17 areas, the 2015 had 11 excellent, 4 above average ( good ), 1 average & 1 poor. The overall reliability rating was average.
The 2016 had 13 excellent, 2 below average & 2 poor. The overall reliability rating given was poor.

Seems a tad harsh. And odd since basically the same car.

Tuckerdog1

This is why I have a very hard time trusting anything that the "independant" "unbiased" Consumer Reports has to say about anything.

As Tuckerdog1 has already clearly pointed out, the areas that are listed in the review for 2015 vs. 2016 models are identical with ZERO changes between model years. Like LITERALLY the climate system is IDENTICAL, the brakes are IDENTICAL, Paint and Trim IDENTICAL (minus a few features in the 5.0 model), Body Integrity IDENTICAL, Suspension IDENTICAL (except for the active suspension in the 5.0), Power Equipment is IDENTICAL, Audio System is IDENTICAL.

These "unbiased" reviewers are clearly smoking something that I'd like to try

 

[Mark_888]

This whole subject of Consumer Reports has been discussed many times before, and even very recently, in other threads. There are three kinds of "ratings" that Consumer Reports does:

1. Normal subjective vehicle evaluation and rating against others in the same class. Usually they give a score of 1-100. Often they present the ratings for 4-5 cars at a time in the same class.
2. Discussion of long term value, based on historical depreciation.
3. CR Reliability Ratings.

It is not clear which ratings everyone is talking about in this thread. Some are talking about reliability, and others talking about depreciation or "worst buy."

The Consumer Reports reliability ratings are NOT SUBJECTIVE, they are based Solely on statistics from hundreds of thousands of surveys submitted each year by current Consumer Reports members (and former members) for each car they own (as well as many other products, appliances, etc). I get a survey each year, even though I only subscribed for one year a long time ago. Obviously, these days the surveys are done online, but at one time years ago they done manually and mailed in.

I don't know why the 2015 and 2016 are so different, but it may be due to a smaller sample size of 2016 (introducing more sampling error), or maybe the 2015 was projected reliability based on the 2014 models. But if one gets ahold of the actual historical CR reliability ratings for each car, it is by far the most accurate of any other statistical data available. So the idea that CR is being "harsh" is absurd, since they just publish the survey data they receive without any interpretation. That does not mean the conclusions are 100 accurate, because in any statistical survey, if one does not get info from every owner, then there are sample size errors and "confidence level" ranges (expressed as a percentage, typically about 90-95%) that exist in any statistical survey or poll.

The other problem is that the Hyundai Genesis (or Genesis G80) has a number of trim levels, and the higher trim levels typically have had more problems reported because they have a lot more gadgets that can go wrong, but the results for all trim levels are combined together.

 

[AustinTX]

What is their definition of "worst" buy, reliability or total ownership costs? I would dispute their findings either way as several independent sources have found the genesis is likely "good" in reliability overall. As far as depreciation, you have to look at average transaction costs and not percent off MSRP as many members report a larger discount than Lexus would give on a GS for example.

They heyday of Consumer Reports was the late 1980's before the internet came along. Back then, you had basically no way to get unbiased feedback on a product other than the off chance you might know someone with a similar product. Now, with so many sources and forums to get empirical data, the days of the paid subscription model with no ads is numbered.

Clearly each individual will have their own experience; my 2015 3.8 AWD Ultimate has and continues to be one of the best cars I have ever owned. My previous car was a 2011 Infiniti FX-50...

Why you had to lead off with a comment about "Hungary", that looks to me to be a simple typo is odd and just a little demeaning... What are you driving now?

What problems do you have with your Genny? I copped a 2015 with tech package about 6 months ago. Anything I should look out for ?

This whole subject of Consumer Reports has been discussed many times before, and even very recently, in other threads. There are three kinds of "ratings" that Consumer Reports does:

1. Normal subjective vehicle evaluation and rating against others in the same class. Usually they give a score of 1-100. Often they present the ratings for 4-5 cars at a time in the same class.
2. Discussion of long term value, based on historical depreciation.
3. CR Reliability Ratings.

It is not clear which ratings everyone is talking about in this thread. Some are talking about reliability, and others talking about depreciation or "worst buy."

The Consumer Reports reliability ratings are NOT SUBJECTIVE, they are based Solely on statistics from hundreds of thousands of surveys submitted each year by current Consumer Reports members (and former members) for each car they own (as well as many other products, appliances, etc). I get a survey each year, even though I only subscribed for one year a long time ago. Obviously, these days the surveys are done online, but at one time years ago they done manually and mailed in.

I don't know why the 2015 and 2016 are so different, but it may be due to a smaller sample size of 2016 (introducing more sampling error), or maybe the 2015 was projected reliability based on the 2014 models. But if one gets ahold of the actual historical CR reliability ratings for each car, it is by far the most accurate of any other statistical data available. So the idea that CR is being "harsh" is absurd, since they just publish the survey data they receive without any interpretation. That does not mean the conclusions are 100 accurate, because in any statistical survey, if one does not get info from every owner, then there are sample size errors and "confidence level" ranges (expressed as a percentage, typically about 90-95%) that exist in any statistical survey or poll.

The other problem is that the Hyundai Genesis (or Genesis G80) has a number of trim levels, and the higher trim levels typically have had more problems reported because they have a lot more gadgets that can go wrong, but the results for all trim levels are combined together.

Thank you Mark, that is a great summary and very well put.

In the May 2017 issue of CR, they tested luxury cars and the Genesis G80 is 4th out of 12 Luxury Midsize Cars and has a "Recommended" rating, and average predicted reliability (anything below average reliability is automatically disqualified from getting a recommendation, even if they score perfectly in all road test results).

 

[jmilr]

Re: April "Consumer Reports" says '16 is a "worst" buy!

If the problems with your Genesis are that bad, have you taken the matter up with Corporate or just with your dealer? I'm sure they'd appreciate the feedback... And in terms of typos did you mean to say you drive a 3.6 or the more popular 3.8? Good luck with your next ride!

 

[Gunny]

What problems do you have with your Genny? I copped a 2015 with tech package about 6 months ago. Anything I should look out for ?

In my experience, the problem is not the car it is the Dealerships. I love my 2015 5.0 Ultimate but cringe whenever I need so much as an oil change because the Dealer [in my area at least] is awful in just about every way.