One big problem with any magazine that takes ads is that it has to balance ad
dollars against editorial integrity. SInce there are always those willing to
sell their souls for a few more ad dollars, those with real editorial integrity
generally go belly up because the advertisers can always find someone to run ads
with that won't bad mouth their products. But Consumer Reports and most other
"consumer" mags have an additional problem, their readers generally tend to
force them to place an inordinately high value on a low initial price. This
means they will often rate an item high because of its low price even though a
more expensive item may actually be cheaper to own over say a 5 year period.
This is why they tend to rate certain crappy brands over better brands that cost
more. As for sensational crap like the rollover tests, well all the media
attention, even if it's bad, usually translates into increased sales and subs so
you be the judge of the motives there...
andycost wrote:
>
> It's hard to sell magazine ads if you rate your advertisers products poorly.
> That's why I don't trust very many of the consumer report type publications.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gordon Glasgow" <gsglasgow@home.com>
> To: "Datsun Roadster List" <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 8:20 PM
> Subject: RE: Oil Testing Results
>
> > Not meaning to diss anyone, and I'm sure the information was provided with
> good
> > intentions, but I've never considered Consumer Reports to be an
> authoritative
> > source on things automotive. This is the same bunch that rated the Fiat
> X-1/9
> > handling "unacceptable" and got in deep yogurt over the faked Suzuki
> Samurai
> > "rollover" test.
> >
> > I'll stick with the conventional wisdom on this one.
> >
> > Gordon Glasgow
> > Renton, WA
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net
> > [mailto:owner-datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of datsunmike
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 5:11 PM
> > To: Rich Glass; Datsun Roadster List; Bill Strohm
> > Subject: Oil Testing Results
> >
> >
> > Consumer Reports Oil Testing Results
> > =20
> > =20
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =20
> > Consumer Reports Oil Testing Results=20
> > =20
> > Return to Articles Page=20
> > =20
> > Consumer Reports, with one of the most widely respected =
> > product testing laboratories in the world has just released the results =
> > of an extensive test on oil brands and oil changes, as well as other =
> > issues regarding car care. In the process, the test demolished much of =
> > the conventional wisdom regarding car lubrication. The two most =
> > surprising results: the frequency with which oil is changed doesn't =
> > matter after the first few oil changes on a new engine, and the type or =
> > brand of oil used can not be shown to make any difference.
> >
> > The testers placed freshly rebuilt engines in 75 New York =
> > taxis and then ran them for nearly two years, with each cab racking up =
> > 60,000 miles, placing different brands and weights in different cars and =
> > changing the oil at 3,000 miles in half the cars and 6,000 in the other =
> > half. At the conclusion of the test period, the engines were torn down, =
> > measured and inspected. The conclusions: Regardless of brand of oil or =
> > weight, no measurable differences could be observed in engine wear. =
> > Furthermore, there was no difference among cars which had oil changed at =
> > the shorter or longer interval.
> >
> > Does this have any bearing on the enthusiast's car, which is =
> > given almost the opposite usage stored for long periods of time then =
> > started and driven for short distances? The tests suggested that our =
> > type of usage would build up sludge and varnish, indicating that an =
> > annual or semi-annual oil change is a good idea regardless of how much =
> > mileage the car is driven. But there is little indication that the brand =
> > or weight needs to be given serious consideration, and synthetic oil has =
> > no discernible advantage over the old stand-bys. More information on the =
> > tests and results can be obtained from Consumers Union or the July issue =
> > of Consumer Reports available at most libraries.
> >
> > Source: British Car Magazine, October-November 1996
> >
> > Related Stories:
> >
> > More Than You Ever Wanted to Know About Motor Oil
> >
> > An Excerpt from a SAE Oil Filter Test Oil filter efficency =
> > test and a list of filters that fit the Spitfire
> >
> > Visit the Mopar site for the study of major old filters and =
> > the results
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Return to Articles Page =20
> >
> > =20
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > premast.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > referbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > maintbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > howtobut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > salebut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > clubbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > funbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > Magazbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > otherbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > siteindex.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > returnbut.gif]
> >
> > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of
> > back.gif]
--
Marc Sayer
82 280ZXT
71 510 2.5 Trans Am vintage racer
|