That was basically Lutz's characterization of the Volt. A car you could jump into on short notice and drive to visit grandma in the hospital 3 hours away. You know, a regular car that happened to be the most advanced and efficient in the planet. His dream continues...

 

Consumer Reports have been biased against the Volt, and even this new report is slightly slanted against the Volt. They only changed their tone when the Volt customers were extremely satisfied. I don't believe the crap that Consumer Reports have been publishing after they were so biased against the Volt. They tried so hard to drive it in such a way that it will achieve the lowest mpg and the lowest EV range. As for me, with my 2012 Chevy Volt, I regularly hit over 50 EV miles on a charge. The next Generation Volt that I am going to get, I am sure I will regularly drive it over 70 EV miles on a charge and could continue 500 miles on gas. GM has always over delivered on their specs. The Consumer Reports tried its best to underperform so poorly that it is not normal to drive the Chevy Volt like what they are doing in their tests. So I have stopped my subscription from Consumer Reports and I hope everybody does the same.

 

So I have stopped my subscription from Consumer Reports and I hope everybody does the same.

My issues with CR have little to do with a particular car. Now that Jim Guest is gone I'll wait for my sub to run out and then decide. There are a lot of changes lately, but I'm not sure if they're good changes or just dumbing down the zine.

 

Come on guys, an article written by Efarts is not even funny to talk about. Really ? EFarts ?!? The name says it all.

 

I don't really see what the problem is about the article. I find it pretty accurate and on point with the exception of the electric range comment.
There really isn't anything ground breaking. The biggest thing would be the new electric motors, but still nothing to breath taking.

 

As a long time subscriber to Consumer Reports I find their articles very accurate. If memory serves, when CR first tested the Volt it was tested in the Winter months, and as we all know range suffered. Later, as time went on and it naturally warmed (I believe their testing is done in Maryland) the miles came up. So their first impressions with range, was done in the COLD weather with the heater blasting away. They complained that the heater was a little lacking. This was a 2011 model. GM, addressed this and said the heater was better in the 2012s. I type all this from memory, so I could be off slightly, but not by much. I was very interested in the Volt. Also, remember, at this time a loaded Volt was 46k, plus dealer gouging. And CR buys all their cars as a regular purchase, just like you and I do. So to recap, they paid out the wazoo for a Volt that they tested in the winter. They gave it praise, but noted its short comings as we all have, especially cold weather range.

 

My first indication that CR was biased when they classified the Chevy Vega as the worst car GM has ever produced, yet at that time I had my 1975 Chevy Vega Kammback Wagon, my first GM vehicle. It gave me excellent service and only failed twice (the torque converter and the electric fuel pump) in eleven years. I saw how CR defended the Japanese cars, and here they were sold cheaper than the domestics but servicing was very expensive ($250 for a Corolla starter in 1979?). Later CR continued to give bad reviews for most American made cars, but my personal experience was opposite of their reviews.

I never subscribe to CR, but I browse their magazines in stores and I do believe what they publish about appliances, as my experiences did match their reviews. I wish they would now accept the new GM designs and give them better reviews and scores.

 

Their comments about electric range are irrelevant. They probably drove in subzero weather. I love the comment that the Volt got "acceleration better than a Toyota Prius." That would be true of almost every car on the planet!

 

I cancelled my consumer reports years ago, don't really think they offer what I wanted. Although they aren't influenced by advertiser dollars so they aren't biased that way, they are an organization with members and are biased by their members. My main complaint is I think they test everything from a common person perspective, which doesn't apply to me as an enthusiast. If you want to buy no hassle transportation and as point A to B driving, they are good. For an enthusiast? Not as much. Same with everything, cameras, etc.

Take the Jeep Wrangler for example, they rate it horrible every single year, yet that vehicle receives almost no updates and sells extremely well, and has higher resale value than almost any other vehicle. It is a smart buy if you want to drive off road, or don't care that it handles like crap on the highway.

I agree with some of their assessment with the Volt, but they use more opinion in their than they should. They are spot on with the center stack though, and that is a big complaint to me which might prevent me from recommending it to someone, but don't care so much myself. I think the Volt 2 will be a lot better as a car for most people.

My other complaint with CR are factual errors. They have botched numerous tests over the years (including one calculating cost to drive hybrids, child seat tests, etc) Even this report is no exception. They say they got 35 with expected range of 40 in original Volt, but the EPA range is what, 38 miles (not 40). The new one should have EPA range of 50, so maybe they would get 45 (not the 40 that they mention) under similar conditions, that is a fair increase. It would mean for me, even on cold days, EV only I would easily be able to avoid gas (assuming I can disable ERDTT).

 

Has CR ever really liked an American Car?

 

CR gave the American-made Tesla an overall rating of 99, the highest ever.

 

CR didn't show the Prius C in a favorable light.

 

What car for 2016 can equal the Volt for electric range, mpg on the gas engine, and distance on a trip. I think only the Volt. The plug in hybrids don't go 50 miles on a charge more like 20-22 miles. The Volt on electric stays on electric for propulsion and never uses the gas engine for that propulsion. The Volt can go over 400 miles. Has seating for 5 people when needed. Hatchback design which gives you the advantage of carrying lots of "stuff". Both BMW plug in's don't even come close to range or mpg's etc.

The 2016 Volt averages 41 mpg on regular good old 87 octane. Not many cars today average 41 mpg, some may do that on the highway but not on the average

 

Certainly if the Volt form factor works and one can live with the visibility it is hard to beat. But, I am pretty disappointed with the 2016 gas mileage given that the less aerodynamic Accord Hybrid which weighs a similar amount and largely copied the Volt's drivetrain gets 50 city and 45 highway. Of course the Volt would still handily beat it on a 200 mile or less trip.

 

I bet the 2016 Volt will average in the mid 40's mpgs on regular gas in ice mode. I believe Fuelly has the mpg's of its members
for the current Honda Accord Hybrid. Our 2014 Volt in summer was low to mid 40's mpg in ice mode. Winter not so much. Yesterday with 45-48 temps, pouring rain and standing water on the roadway was only 35 mpg on just the ice for a 140 mile roundtrip to Longview Washington.