[QUOTE="Scott Schuckert"]\n[Consumer Reports/Union]\nI remember the year they recommended the Miranda Sensorex over the\nNikon Ftn, because it was so much MORE RELIABLE. See, they asked people\nwho had them how many repairs they had, but NOT how many rolls a year\nthey'd shot...[/QUOTE]\n\nA classic. Did they have to appologize for that one?\n\nOne year they again rated 35mm SLRs: this time by weight! Canon\nEOS Rebel was a better camera than Nikon's F4s, which rated very poorly.\n\nCoffee was rated by how many tea/table/spoons the can said to use\nper cup: some said less, some more. The more coffee the can said\nto use the higher the 'taste panel' rated the coffee. All the\nEuro brands were at the bottom of the list: the standard Euro\ncoffee cup is 1/2 the size of the US standard so the can indicates\n1/2 as much coffee. Mellita and Haag(?) were at the bottom of\ntheir list - you would have thought common sense would have kicked in.\n\nBose Speakers [and I do not like Bose speakers]: The listening\npanel didn't like the way they sounded, rated Radio Shack higher.\nThe Mr. Bose of Bose investigated: the 'listening panel' was a 70\nyear old retiree and a high-school intern, and only one of them\nhad listened to the Bose speakers. CU lost the lawsuit - amazing\nthey bothered with a defense. Interestingly, Bose\ncomponents are now _always_ rated highest by CU.\n\nUsed car reliability reports: one year they rated cars by year\ncomparing the rate among _all_ years. Anything over 3 years old\nhad terrible reliability: a '96 Toyota rated poorly because it\nwas much less reliable than a 2000 Chevy. A 96 Toyota should\nhave been compared to a 96 Chevy.\n\nIf their ratings don't agree with my preconceptions I ignore\nthem ... so why do I bother consulting CR I ask myself.