Kizashi included in list of "11 New Cars to Avoid"
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:57 am
A recent Yahoo article was posted regarding an originally Forbes article on "11 New Cars to Avoid".
As you may have guessed from my posting of it, it included the Kizashi along with the Grand Vitara and the SX4.
Other cars included 3 Jeeps, a Dodge, a Volvo, 2 Nissans, and the Smart car.
It was interesting to see basically all Suzuki's on there, especially the Kizashi.
The article goes to reference Consumer Reports and J.D. Power on their opinions and ratings on the cars.
The article states this for the Kizashi:
"This modest midsize sedan is reasonably likeable, though it’s overshadowed by most other models in its segment. It will soon be orphaned along with the rest of the Suzuki line as the brand winds down its U.S. auto operations. J.D. Power gives it low grades for initial quality and long-term reliability, while Consumer Reports faults the Kizashi’s four-cylinder powertrain for being, “rather leisurely…the CVT (transmission) makes the engine work hard and noisily to keep up the pace.” "
Interesting piece given what CR and J.D. Powers claim and I call biased bullshit.
Why? Let's examine the facts, straight from CR and J.D. Power themselves.
I own a copy of Consumer Reports' 2012 New Car Ratings and Reviews.
In there, they did not "recommend" the Kizashi, but gave it a score of 82 points. That's higher than the following "Recommended" cars: Ford Fusion (76), Honda Accord (80), Kia Optima (81), Mazda6 (73), and Volvo S60 (77) for comparison purposes.
CR also rated the comparable Subaru Legacy a 83 and gave it the coveted "Recommended" rating.
Interesting that CR seems to think the Kizashi is lacking yet it is only 1 measly point away from their acclaimed Legacy of their beloved Subaru brand (which also has a sluggish CVT).
If that is not bias, I don't know what is. The only logical explanation is that they did not have reliability data on the car to recommend it. But wait, that never stops them from singing praise of new, untested Toyota models.
Also in my magazine, CR gave the SX4 a "Recommended" rating also adding that it had "above average reliability", but the SX4 also made it into the article among the cars to avoid. Hmm. How do you explain that other than negative brand bias after the bankruptcy?
J.D. Power is even more of a joke. As the quote states for the Kizashi, "J.D. Power gives it low grades for initial quality and long-term reliability".
Is this the same J.D. Power that awarded the Kizashi "J.D. Power and Associates' 2011 Automotive Performance Execution and Layout (APEAL) Study Award"?
So, according to J.D. Power, the car can win awards from them yet still have low quality and poor reliability? Wait, the Kizashi has low grades for long-term reliability when it's only been in the market for 3 years!? All J.D. Power can provide in terms of data is a bubble rating of 2 out of 5 for "predicted reliability". Hmm, predictions are not data. I thought these guys did research, not faulty fortune telling.
Interestingly, the only thing that happened regarding the Kizashi and J.D. Power in the last year was that Suzuki stopped paying J.D. Power for surveys regarding their cars. All of a sudden, J.D. Power reverses their findings and claims the Kizashi is a poor choice. The bias from the money trail is so obvious it should be embarrassing for them. If you want a side of bullshit with a plate of bias, J.D. Power is your go-to source.
You can read the ridiculous article for yourselves here. I have already lambasted the idiocy and bias of CR and J.D. Power in the Yahoo comments. What they say about the Wrangler is also ridiculous. Did they expect Jeep to make some kind of cushy sedan with it?
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/11-new-cars ... 14797.html
As you may have guessed from my posting of it, it included the Kizashi along with the Grand Vitara and the SX4.
Other cars included 3 Jeeps, a Dodge, a Volvo, 2 Nissans, and the Smart car.
It was interesting to see basically all Suzuki's on there, especially the Kizashi.
The article goes to reference Consumer Reports and J.D. Power on their opinions and ratings on the cars.
The article states this for the Kizashi:
"This modest midsize sedan is reasonably likeable, though it’s overshadowed by most other models in its segment. It will soon be orphaned along with the rest of the Suzuki line as the brand winds down its U.S. auto operations. J.D. Power gives it low grades for initial quality and long-term reliability, while Consumer Reports faults the Kizashi’s four-cylinder powertrain for being, “rather leisurely…the CVT (transmission) makes the engine work hard and noisily to keep up the pace.” "
Interesting piece given what CR and J.D. Powers claim and I call biased bullshit.
Why? Let's examine the facts, straight from CR and J.D. Power themselves.
I own a copy of Consumer Reports' 2012 New Car Ratings and Reviews.
In there, they did not "recommend" the Kizashi, but gave it a score of 82 points. That's higher than the following "Recommended" cars: Ford Fusion (76), Honda Accord (80), Kia Optima (81), Mazda6 (73), and Volvo S60 (77) for comparison purposes.
CR also rated the comparable Subaru Legacy a 83 and gave it the coveted "Recommended" rating.
Interesting that CR seems to think the Kizashi is lacking yet it is only 1 measly point away from their acclaimed Legacy of their beloved Subaru brand (which also has a sluggish CVT).
If that is not bias, I don't know what is. The only logical explanation is that they did not have reliability data on the car to recommend it. But wait, that never stops them from singing praise of new, untested Toyota models.
Also in my magazine, CR gave the SX4 a "Recommended" rating also adding that it had "above average reliability", but the SX4 also made it into the article among the cars to avoid. Hmm. How do you explain that other than negative brand bias after the bankruptcy?
J.D. Power is even more of a joke. As the quote states for the Kizashi, "J.D. Power gives it low grades for initial quality and long-term reliability".
Is this the same J.D. Power that awarded the Kizashi "J.D. Power and Associates' 2011 Automotive Performance Execution and Layout (APEAL) Study Award"?
So, according to J.D. Power, the car can win awards from them yet still have low quality and poor reliability? Wait, the Kizashi has low grades for long-term reliability when it's only been in the market for 3 years!? All J.D. Power can provide in terms of data is a bubble rating of 2 out of 5 for "predicted reliability". Hmm, predictions are not data. I thought these guys did research, not faulty fortune telling.
Interestingly, the only thing that happened regarding the Kizashi and J.D. Power in the last year was that Suzuki stopped paying J.D. Power for surveys regarding their cars. All of a sudden, J.D. Power reverses their findings and claims the Kizashi is a poor choice. The bias from the money trail is so obvious it should be embarrassing for them. If you want a side of bullshit with a plate of bias, J.D. Power is your go-to source.
You can read the ridiculous article for yourselves here. I have already lambasted the idiocy and bias of CR and J.D. Power in the Yahoo comments. What they say about the Wrangler is also ridiculous. Did they expect Jeep to make some kind of cushy sedan with it?
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/11-new-cars ... 14797.html