"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
ups.com...
You have far more stops in NYC than most folks do. But on the average,
the
Prius and the Honda Civic hybrid do only a little better in city vs.
highway
driving.


Wrong again. We drove the car in PA. Locally, away from Route 80 we had
nearly 10 MPG more, which is consistant with other reports on Edmunds.

I'll trust the other automotive magazines I've read over your experience.
And since I haven't read Edmund's reports on hybrids . . .


Say, Bubbles--are you going to run that Bendy Toy on biodiesel? If
not, you
should be ashamed.


Judging by her light air ability demonstrated Sunday, that engine will
barely be used at all.

Since she'll seldom leave the dock, I concur.



I raced D and E production in SCCA track events for over 20 years.
Does
that qualify me to know "something about driving?"

Wow, and yet you still get so much wrong. Just goes to prove: Old
knowledge is often bad knowledge.

Wrong by your standards is probably right by everyone else's.


Max

I'll trust the other automotive magazines I've read over your
experience.
And since I haven't read Edmund's reports on hybrids . . .


More evidence that you can't even research properly. Edmunds has owner
forums and you can read what people are truly getting from a car in a
variety of locations. Magazine tests are too limited on their own to
judge something like MPG.

Wrong by your standards is probably right by everyone else's

According to Edmunds and the many Hybrid owners posting there, you're
wrong...about all of it.



RB
35s5
NY

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
I'll trust the other automotive magazines I've read over your
experience.
And since I haven't read Edmund's reports on hybrids . . .


More evidence that you can't even research properly. Edmunds has owner
forums and you can read what people are truly getting from a car in a
variety of locations. Magazine tests are too limited on their own to
judge something like MPG.

Are you saying that Consumer Reports is too limited to include owner
surveys? AAMOF, CS has consumer feedback on every car sold in America,
unless it's too new to be valid. Not to mention that magazine tests are
performed by highly experienced individuals whose only job is to perform
such tests and write them up. That would be in contrast to a single
self-proclaimed expert of everything whose unknowledgable opinions are
completely worthless in the overall scheme of things.


Wrong by your standards is probably right by everyone else's

According to Edmunds and the many Hybrid owners posting there, you're
wrong...about all of it.

I'm sure the "many hybrid owners" are more orgasmic about their cars than
about the second coming of Christ. After all they already bought them and
are stuck with an cost-inefficient technology that will be superceded
shortly.

Max

I'm sure the "many hybrid owners" are more orgasmic about their cars
than
about the second coming of Christ. After all they already bought them
and
are stuck with an cost-inefficient technology that will be superceded
shortly.


Plenty of folks give bad reviews to their new cars, Maxi. Just cruise
the Ford or GM forums.
As for Consumer Reports, every auto enthusiast considers them a joke,
even worse than MotorTrend. They're fine if you need help buying a
washing machine. And CR thinks Bose is world class sound. Nuff said.

RB
35s5
NY

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
I'm sure the "many hybrid owners" are more orgasmic about their cars
than
about the second coming of Christ. After all they already bought them
and
are stuck with an cost-inefficient technology that will be superceded
shortly.


Plenty of folks give bad reviews to their new cars, Maxi. Just cruise
the Ford or GM forums.
As for Consumer Reports, every auto enthusiast considers them a joke,

I'm an auto enthusiast, and I don't, which clearly refutes that statement.

even worse than MotorTrend. They're fine if you need help buying a
washing machine. And CR thinks Bose is world class sound. Nuff said.

The Consumer Union does three things that no one else does: 1) they *buy*
the cars they test--they are not specially-prepared cars, provided by the
manufacturers, owners, or dealerships like ALL the other automotive press
uses. They just go buy an example of the car off someone's lot, and they
don't tell them what it's for. 2) they test the car over a period of months,
not just a one or two-day trial at some track and over a piece of roadway.
3) they take no advertising from manufacturers, thereby not committing
themselves to fluffing a road test in order to keep an advertiser happy.

Every other American road test group, whether automotive printed media or
on-line source, uses borrowed cars. And if they pan the car too severely,
they can kiss getting future vehicles for testing goodbye, not to mention
lost advertising revenues. The British magazines are somewhat less beholden
to the manufacturers, but they, too, use borrowed cars.

It's not surprising that lots of enthusiasts dislike Consumer Reports. If
you've paid $50K for a new Corvette, and CR has just published a road test
calling it a piece of plastic junk with more rattles than a wealthy baby,
you probably are going to take issue with them. It's like Practical Sailor
magazine--I hear far more hate-speak toward them than praise, but then they
call 'em the way they see 'em, too. Any time someone knocks your particular
boat, car, anchor, or whatever, you're going to be ****ed. And you're
probably going to do whatever you can to discredit that source.

Consumer Reports does one other thing: they do the most inclusive and
extensive owner surveys in the industry. Only Road & Track magazine does a
good job in this area, but not as extensive as CR.

Go ahead, Bubbles--shoot the messenger. But if the foo ****s . . .

As for Bose, they made some very fine speaker systems years ago. I have no
idea what they produce now, but I'm guessing you're prejudice against them
is long-standing and based on seriously out-dated information from CR. I've
never seen CR refer to Bose as "world-class sound," so I have to conclude
that this is something you heard from other prejudiced types. I'm under the
impression that you've probably never had an original thought in your life.

I have B&W speakers in every room that has a sound system. There are none
finer at any price, but the old Bose 901s I used to own were certainly
within the 95th percentile compared with my B&Ws.

Max

I have B&W speakers in every room that has a sound system. There are
none
finer at any price, but the old Bose 901s I used to own were certainly
within the 95th percentile compared with my B&Ws.


Wow...I read everything you wrote up to this point and was about to
respond until I came to the hilarious comments about Bose and B&W.
Maxi there are plenty of finer speakers than your B&Ws. In fact, even
if you have 801's in every room, there are plenty that are better from
Martin Logan, Revel and of course Snell. I just sold my B&W CDM 1
center channel (a 900 dollar speaker) and it was good, but hardly the
best. My Revel speakers did everything better. Likewise my rear channel
B&W LM-1s, also sold off. Good gear from B&W (mated to Rotel amp and
preamp), but tippy highs require a more laid back preamp section. Yet
B&W uses Rotel for their listening tests!
As for Bose, even their top of the line 901s were a joke for false
imaging and Bose has always employed cheap drivers combined with unique
cabinets to fool less educated listeners...folks like you. Go listen to
a pair of Revel Ultima Gem's and then tell me what you think of your
B&Ws.
I get the feeling, as with BMW, that you're a fellow who buys into
advertising hook, line and sinker.


RB
35s5
NY

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
ups.com...
I have B&W speakers in every room that has a sound system. There are
none
finer at any price, but the old Bose 901s I used to own were certainly
within the 95th percentile compared with my B&Ws.


Wow...I read everything you wrote up to this point and was about to
respond until I came to the hilarious comments about Bose and B&W.
Maxi there are plenty of finer speakers than your B&Ws. In fact, even
if you have 801's in every room, there are plenty that are better from
Martin Logan, Revel and of course Snell. I just sold my B&W CDM 1
center channel (a 900 dollar speaker) and it was good, but hardly the
best. My Revel speakers did everything better. Likewise my rear channel
B&W LM-1s, also sold off. Good gear from B&W (mated to Rotel amp and
preamp), but tippy highs require a more laid back preamp section. Yet
B&W uses Rotel for their listening tests!
As for Bose, even their top of the line 901s were a joke for false
imaging and Bose has always employed cheap drivers combined with unique
cabinets to fool less educated listeners...folks like you. Go listen to
a pair of Revel Ultima Gem's and then tell me what you think of your
B&Ws.
I get the feeling, as with BMW, that you're a fellow who buys into
advertising hook, line and sinker.

Bubbles, you're obviously little more than a regurgitation of other people's
opinions. You read something in Audiophile and it becomes gospel. Then you
listen to someone's highly colored speakers and decide, "oh yeah, those
really are the best." And then you go blow cash, believing you've reached
Nirvana.

Answer this: why do more recording studios have B&Ws as their monitors than
any other speaker made? Hint: they reproduce sound accurately, without
color, and without gimmicks. Those with no concept of what makes a great
loudspeaker generally don't care much for B&Ws. They like that thumping
bass, that screaming treble, that blaring midrange. Of course the original
performance didn't have all those components, but what the hell . . .

Max