A friend and I were just reviewing the latest Consumer Reports Auto Buying Guide (he'* ni the market for a new used car) and stumbled upon the worst used cars list. Listed on the page (among with what seemed every other domestic auto) was the 2000 - 2002 Pontiac Bonneville. Justification for the listing wasn't given.

It makes me wonder why 2000 - 2002 is any worse than all of the 2000+ years. For the record 99 and older was listed as a "neutral" buy.

Interesting. I never did have much faith in consumer reports though. I would like them to show me a better used car than mine in the $7k-$8k range... Gas mileage, reliability(after intake repair), good looks, and well optioned. You can't beat that IMO.
Grant

I don't read that crap. They are EXTREMELY biased towards japanese cars. If you notice, almost every Japanese car has a top rating, while most European and American cars have "poor" ratings. Funny thing is some of the Japanese cars they listed as top ratings are known on other sites as "requiring many repairs" or classified as unreliable.

Consumer Reports has to wait a few years before they give a reliability rating to a model year. Rest assured that in 2 years the H-bodies up to 2004 will also be on the "avoid" list.

I hate to say it, but GM does deserve to have these cars on Consumer Reports' "neutral" to "poor" reliability list because of their decision to use plastic LIM gaskets and unsleeved plastic UIM (up to '05)...to the typical consumer who doesn't know about the issue and doesn't do his own engine teardowns, these are problems that, no matter how well-maintained the car is, will afflict almost every single one of them, will lead to a stranding, expensive repairs, and often a destroyed engine.

In addition to the engine'* internal coolant issues, there'* GM'* decision to use substandard input shaft seals, and poorly designed pressure control solenoid and unhardened 4th gear shaft in the 4T6x transaxle (up to '03, anyway).

Alas, for an extra probably $30 to $50 per car in properly engineered parts, GM could have put out one of the most reliable engines and FWD drivetrains ever...instead, they get put on the "avoid" list and surely cost themselves tens of millions (possibly billions!) of dollars in warranty service and lost repeat business over the last 10-15 years.

All that being said, I do agree that Consumer Reports is an Asian imports fan rag, and that the GM H-bodies are a great value used...if you know what to watch out for (which, BTW, I really did not until joining this forum 6 months ago).

Working with my mechanic buddy frequently enough..I can do a consumer report for you

If it has wheels...it'* going to have issues and need to be fixed sooner or later.

When broken..they all suck.

There...how'd I do? Where'* my paycheck for the advice?

must only apply to White cars

paypal?

To wit: If it has ***** or brakes, it'* gonna cost ya.

I don't read consumer reports because I don't trust them . I also have a mind of my own and I really don't need a magazine to tell me what to buy.

Whats sad is that GM knew about the problems and took so long to fix them.

Lets see, intake issues started in 95, and they werent truly fixed until the arrival of the L26 correct? and that was in what ? '05? '06? Something like that. Give or take ten years, thousands and thousands of cars, all with the same problem and it takes them 10 years to do anything about it.

Only took them 5 years for the transmission I guess.

I know it takes time for these problems to make themselves known, and then to become common. But cmon now.

They obviously took account of some of these problems when designing the newer engines. Because the Shortstar uses a composite UIM and it does not have UIM or LIM issues whatsoever, at least with any sort of repetition.