Consumer Reports GV80

[EdP]

I don't take their reviews as gospel, but I certainly don't believe they're incompetent or extremely biased. Why would they be? They've been doing this a long time. Their testing is methodical and they report on measurable parameters, like mpg, 0-60 times, leg room, etc... I think they try to avoid subjective things, such as the styling or appearance.

Methodical, yes. Of course they are biased, we all are to some extent. Do they disparage a particular brand? No. But we all have bias to one thing or another. They have a bias towards safety and economy more than performance. You won't see one model rated higher because there is a good tune available for it but some of us here would.

There choices often differ from mine but you can get information from their testing and apply it to your own priorities to decision making. .

 

[Far Side]

Absolutely agree..
CR actually rates the GMC Acadia higher than the GV80..!!!
No credibility...

In the very few areas I have experience in, I have seen them quite wrong. As Ed just mentioned you can often use their data for your own conclusions but I would not recommend them to do your thinking for you.

 

[Husky]

Methodical, yes. Of course they are biased, we all are to some extent. Do they disparage a particular brand? No. But we all have bias to one thing or another. They have a bias towards safety and economy more than performance. You won't see one model rated higher because there is a good tune available for it but some of us here would.

There choices often differ from mine but you can get information from their testing and apply it to your own priorities to decision making. .

Would you rather they had a "bias" against safety? Is that a bias? I think we'd all prefer to own and drive cars that don't roll over or catch fire when they shouldn't, and be informed about the ones that do.
Yes, they value economy, but they have also praised and appreciated performance oriented cars, even though they may get poor mileage.
Clearly, CR is not published with just car enthusiasts in mind. They aren't going to get involved with tunes, or any after market add-ons. They provide useful information to car shoppers of all types. There's lots of people who aren't great heads or car nuts. Think of all the mini van and SUVs out there! As you said, we can all make use of their data and take what we want from it.

 

[Husky]

I don't recommend anyone let a magazine or anything/anyone "do their thinking for them". However when car shopping (new or used), I find it useful to see the data from a large number of owners regarding reliability and problem areas for pretty much any make and model, over a range of years. No one else I know of provides this data. It's certainly not all I look at, but it's good to have.
Haven't you ever read a glowing Car and Driver review of a car you're familiar with, and thought to yourself "yeah, but you didn't talk about how the ____ (fill in the blank) is going to fall apart at 50k miles"? I love C & D, and have subscribed to it for the last forty years, but they don't address reliability much at all, as that's not their purpose in life. You need to look at different sources to get different types of information so you can make an informed decision.

 

[EdP]

Would you rather they had a "bias" against safety? Is that a bias? I think we'd all prefer to own and drive cars that don't roll over or catch fire when they shouldn't, and be informed about the ones that do.
Yes, they value economy, but they have also praised and appreciated performance oriented cars, even though they may get poor mileage.
Clearly, CR is not published with just car enthusiasts in mind. They aren't going to get involved with tunes, or any after market add-ons. They provide useful information to car shoppers of all types. There's lots of people who aren't great heads or car nuts. Think of all the mini van and SUVs out there! As you said, we can all make use of their data and take what we want from it.

See my post #8 Many years ago I subscribed to them but I can do my own research for what suites me best.

 

[billf]

I'm puzzled by the CR review that came out today on the GV80. For the most part, the narrative is extremely favorable yet the overall rating was mediocre-63. Road test score 81. These numbers are much below other vehicles like the Subaru Outback.

If you read the entire review they actually liked the car. If you read their explanation of their rating system you will see that when additional information and testing comes out that the rating could change for the better or worse. There were a couple things they noted that they did not like. Mostly it seems it was about the infotainment. The one point I could not understand was their criticism that if you turned the dial too far you missed park and you were into reverse. I test drove the vehicle and the rotary dial did not have a park on it. I believe I pushed the button to put it in park. Also, since not all the safety testing is done yet I assume some of the points were removed for that reason. If those test results come in strong, I would think it would gain points. I also think as reliability experience comes in that could either increase or decrease its points as noted above, Generally. it was a very positive review and in spite of their criticism of fuel economy they recommend getting the 3.5 twin turbo.Their top rated luxury SUV is the BMW X5. While the Genesis has one recall on 2.5 turbo, the X5 has 11 recalls that are active. I just drove both. I could’ve gone either way. I ordered the 3.5 turbo Prestige. They noted their concern about the ride on the 22 inch tires.I have the same concern, but after a while if I don’t like them I will switch them out for 20s. Years ago when the Mercedes GLC came out i looked at it because Consumer Reports had it rated so highly. About two years later it’s rating had dropped dramatically. So these ratings are a moving target for some vehicles. About 20 years ago I bought a car that was their number one rated sedan In a certain segment. I actually hated the vehicle but kept the car because it was very reliable.

 

[waveman]

If you read the entire review they actually liked the car. If you read their explanation of their rating system you will see that when additional information and testing comes out that the rating could change for the better or worse. There were a couple things they noted that they did not like. Mostly it seems it was about the infotainment. The one point I could not understand was their criticism that if you turned the dial too far you missed park and you were into reverse. I test drove the vehicle and the rotary dial did not have a park on it. I believe I pushed the button to put it in park. Also, since not all the safety testing is done yet I assume some of the points were removed for that reason. If those test results come in strong, I would think it would gain points. I also think as reliability experience comes in that could either increase or decrease its points as noted above, Generally. it was a very positive review and in spite of their criticism of fuel economy they recommend getting the 3.5 twin turbo.Their top rated luxury SUV is the BMW X5. While the Genesis has one recall on 2.5 turbo, the X5 has 11 recalls that are active. I just drove both. I could’ve gone either way. I ordered the 3.5 turbo Prestige. They noted their concern about the ride on the 22 inch tires.I have the same concern, but after a while if I don’t like them I will switch them out for 20s. Years ago when the Mercedes GLC came out i looked at it because Consumer Reports had it rated so highly. About two years later it’s rating had dropped dramatically. So these ratings are a moving target for some vehicles. About 20 years ago I bought a car that was their number one rated sedan In a certain segment. I actually hated the vehicle but kept the car because it was very reliable.

I agree with this. CR uses several types of data for their ratings. Some are objectively testable, others are unavoidably more subjective. But what some call bias actually reflects weighting based on their thinking about what should count more. However, if all CR cared about was utilitarian vehicles, they wouldn't test luxury vehicles at all, even though enthusiasts value things they don't.

My biggest concern is that they extrapolate reliability data across vehicle lines, which they did with the GV80. Relying on user surveys also may be problematic, though there is probably no other way for them to obtain reliability data. As @billf says, though, their ratings on a given vehicle change over time as more data comes in and partly because of what the competition does.

 

[jimmak]

I've seen few mentions of problems with the GV80 on this board. Most I've seen have been minor or related to the learning curve. The car is not perfect, but it is pretty damn good.

I understand most of the issues with Korean models were with the diesel engine which is not available in North America.

It will rank much higher several years into the model and drop again with a major refresh. It is interesting to read their review of the Chrysler 300. It is almost bullet proof because it has been virtually unchanged for about a decade. That is coming from a corporate family that is almost always very near the bottom of the list for reliability.

 

[m0pher]

CR thinks everything should be plain vanilla and cars must get 50 mpg. I stopped reading it after we disagreed on what I thought was the best feature of an appliance they thought was frivolous and a detraction.

I agree. They seem to cater to what appears to be their definition of the lowest common denominator. I don't mean that to sound derogatory, I just mean that they want everything to have mass appeal and any differentiation is viewed negatively. Can't review a vehicle like this with that mindset.

 

[RCH04]

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see much of a bias at CR against nicer vehicles. Vehicles are compared with others in a given segment so for the most part it's apples to apples. Here's what they initially said about the GV80. It doesn't sound like much negative bias to me. I'd like to be able to read the actual article being discussed here but I'm not a member.

"Genesis took its time developing the GV80, creating a refined, richly appointed vehicle that we think will attract attention from shoppers right at launch."

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[EdP]

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see much of a bias at CR against nicer vehicles. Vehicles are compared with others in a given segment so for the most part it's apples to apples. Here's what they initially said about the GV80. It doesn't sound like much negative bias to me. I'd like to be able to read the actual article being discussed here but I'm not a member.

"Genesis took its time developing the GV80, creating a refined, richly appointed vehicle that we think will attract attention from shoppers right at launch."

Way in the past I subscribed to CR. Yes, the do have a lot of good information, they maintain their independence from commercial entities and say what they really think of a product. Yes, they will compare a Genesis, Mercedes, BMW, whatever because they have to It is what people buy and they want readers to support them.

Now, I don't completely disagree, but they don't think we need this class of car. Reality, we don't, but we want it. CR has a very basic mindset. Not always a bad thing. Safety advances aside, do we really need anything more than an Impala or Fusion? No, they are perfectly acceptable transportation. But we sure like the extra goodies in a Genesis.

 

[waveman]

I agree. They seem to cater to what appears to be their definition of the lowest common denominator. I don't mean that to sound derogatory, I just mean that they want everything to have mass appeal and any differentiation is viewed negatively. Can't review a vehicle like this with that mindset.

Here's what CR said about the 2016 Tesla S:

"The Model S requires no excuses -- electric car or not. That's why the Model S is the best-scoring car that we've ever tested, with the high-performance P85D variant scoring even higher."

and

"The Tesla rivets your attention from the start. Simply touching the flush aluminum door handles causes them to slide outward, welcoming you inside. With the car-shaped fob in your pocket or purse, a tap of the brake pedal brings the Model S to life. There's no need to insert a key, press a button, or even release the emergency brake. You're immediately greeted by the glow of a huge 17-inch video display that dominates the center of the dash and allows you to control everything from the suspension's ride height to Slacker internet Radio. And as you dip into the throttle, you experience a silent yet potent surge of power that will make many sports cars weep with envy."

Hardly lowest common denominator vehicle phraseology.

 

[m0pher]

Here's what CR said about the 2016 Tesla S:

"The Model S requires no excuses -- electric car or not. That's why the Model S is the best-scoring car that we've ever tested, with the high-performance P85D variant scoring even higher."

and

"The Tesla rivets your attention from the start. Simply touching the flush aluminum door handles causes them to slide outward, welcoming you inside. With the car-shaped fob in your pocket or purse, a tap of the brake pedal brings the Model S to life. There's no need to insert a key, press a button, or even release the emergency brake. You're immediately greeted by the glow of a huge 17-inch video display that dominates the center of the dash and allows you to control everything from the suspension's ride height to Slacker internet Radio. And as you dip into the throttle, you experience a silent yet potent surge of power that will make many sports cars weep with envy."

Hardly lowest common denominator vehicle phraseology.

Perhaps. That said, every Tesla I’ve ever ridden in made me want to get out of it faster than out of a Crown Vic. Teslas - this is just my opinion and clearly many people feel differently, so this isn’t a diss toward Tesla owners - are amazing batteries with really shitty cars wrapped around them. Maybe that will change in time but at the moment I remain unimpressed.

 

[EdP]

Here's what CR said about the 2016 Tesla S:

"The Model S requires no excuses -- electric car or not. That's why the Model S is the best-scoring car that we've ever tested, with the high-performance P85D variant scoring even higher."

and

"The Tesla rivets your attention from the start. Simply touching the flush aluminum door handles causes them to slide outward, welcoming you inside. With the car-shaped fob in your pocket or purse, a tap of the brake pedal brings the Model S to life. There's no need to insert a key, press a button, or even release the emergency brake. You're immediately greeted by the glow of a huge 17-inch video display that dominates the center of the dash and allows you to control everything from the suspension's ride height to Slacker internet Radio. And as you dip into the throttle, you experience a silent yet potent surge of power that will make many sports cars weep with envy."

Hardly lowest common denominator vehicle phraseology.

Do you think it was pumped up a bit because it is an electric car that will save civilization?
Sure, the Tesla has a lot of snazzy features but many other reviews talk about the build quality. No personal experience though.

It certainly is honest about the acceleration though.

 

[waveman]

Perhaps. That said, every Tesla I’ve ever ridden in made me want to get out of it faster than out of a Crown Vic. Teslas - this is just my opinion and clearly many people feel differently, so this isn’t a diss toward Tesla owners - are amazing batteries with really shitty cars wrapped around them. Maybe that will change in time but at the moment I remain unimpressed.

The biggest problem with Teslas based on what I've read is build quality, notably poor fit of body panels. It's unfortunate that Tesla hasn't adequately addressed this, which would keep me from seriously considering one. But I was just using CR's Tesla S review as an example of a vehicle in the luxury price range that they've praised. They've also tested other expensive cars like the BMW 7 series and the Mercedes-Benz S-Class. Their road test reports are often highly positive, even if the overall score is lower than one would expect based on things like fuel economy that we're willing to overlook. That applies to their GV80 review, which was quite favorable.

 

[billf]

The biggest problem with Teslas based on what I've read is build quality, notably poor fit of body panels. It's unfortunate that Tesla hasn't adequately addressed this, which would keep me from seriously considering one. But I was just using CR's Tesla S review as an example of a vehicle in the luxury price range that they've praised. They've also tested other expensive cars like the BMW 7 series and the Mercedes-Benz S-Class. Their road test reports are often highly positive, even if the overall score is lower than one would expect based on things like fuel economy that we're willing to overlook. That applies to their GV80 review, which was quite favorable.

Yes when the Tesla model S came out I think that was the highest rated vehicle they had ever tested up to that point. I think the score was like 99. At one point it dropped down to 60 something as of today it’s at 70.

 

[Husky]

Rats, that didn't take long....

Genesis Recalls 2021 G80 And GV80 Models Over Potential Fuel Leak | Carscoops

The issue involving the Genesis G80 and GV80 concerns a faulty fuel tube

www.carscoops.com

 

[m0pher]

Rats, that didn't take long....

Genesis Recalls 2021 G80 And GV80 Models Over Potential Fuel Leak | Carscoops

The issue involving the Genesis G80 and GV80 concerns a faulty fuel tube

www.carscoops.com

Has anyone had success with Genesis' recall website @ Genesis - Recalls It tells me that I've entered a Hyundai VIN, redirects me to Hyundai - Recalls and then says there are no matches. I don't know if the redirect to Hyundai's website is expected for Genesis vehicles - in some way it makes sense, since they're related. The article says end of May for notifications, so I guess I'll check back then.

 

[YEH]

In their Talking Cars episode with the first impressions of the GV80, the CR panelists had a very favorable impression of the GV80 (6 min mark).

But what gets done for the publication review can end up being quite different as they have to take things like passenger/cargo space, storage, fuel economy, etc. into consideration.

While I do think Genesis could have done a better job with the UI,, kinda funny how they wished it was as easy to use as Hyundai's system when the previous complaint (and not just from CR) was that the Hyundai UI was not exactly befitting a lux vehicle (some of the complaint was due to the quality of graphics/font).

 

[m0pher]

In their Talking Cars episode with the first impressions of the GV80, the CR panelists had a very favorable impression of the GV80 (6 min mark).

But what gets done for the publication review can end up being quite different as they have to take things like passenger/cargo space, storage, fuel economy, etc. into consideration.

While I do think Genesis could have done a better job with the UI,, kinda funny how they wished it was as easy to use as Hyundai's system when the previous complaint (and not just from CR) was that the Hyundai UI was not exactly befitting a lux vehicle (some of the complaint was due to the quality of graphics/font).

Re the UI, my frame of reference is pretty limited when it comes to vehicle infotainment systems, but looking at the GV80's system on its own I find it pretty straightforward. I can even push to rearrange the tiles - a feature that Apple introduced in iOS and is incredibly still missing from its own CarPlay! Anyway, I just wonder what "a better job" would look like as I find it to be more than adequate.