Consumer Reports blasts Honda Insight, ranked 21 of 22 tested
by Chris Paukert on Jun 30th 2009 at 10:30AM 
2009 Honda Insight - Click above for high-res image gallery
Calling it "the most disappointing Honda Consumer Reports has tested in a long time," America's most influential product testing magazine has given extremely poor marks to the Japanese automaker's new Insight hybrid.
In a verdict that reminds us of a certain Jeremy Clarkson review (albeit more kindly worded), Consumer Reports blasted the gas-electric hatchback for its "ride quality, handling, interior noise, acceleration, rear-seat, access, and visibility," consigning the hapless Honda to a 21 out of 22 ranking among other small hatchbacks and wagons. Tallying a road test score of 54 points, it was trailed only by the widely-panned Dodge Caliber, which managed just 49 points.
Despite the fact that it won't receive a much-coveted CR "Recommended" nod, the Insight still managed to post a "Good" overall road test score (largely on the strength of its 38 miles-per-gallon as-tested fuel economy). Regardless, it was comprehensively beaten by both the Volkswagen Jetta Wagon and the Hyundai Elantra Touring, which scored 80 and 79 points, respectively.
The Insight was the only vehicle in CR's test group to not to be Recommended, save Kia's Soul, which was excluded because the organization hasn't compiled any reliability data on the vehicle yet. Check out the press release after the jump.
Gallery: 2010 Honda Insight
[Source: Consumer Reports]
PRESS RELEASE:
CR's engineers say Insight's 38 mpg overall fuel economy is one of its few highs
YONKERS, N.Y., June 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The new Honda Insight posted a lackluster "Good" overall road-test score in Consumer Reports' testing for the August issue. The Insight achieved an excellent 38 mpg overall in CR's tests but fell short in ride quality, handling, interior noise, acceleration, rear-seat, access and visibility.
"The Insight is the most disappointing Honda Consumer Reports has tested in a long time," said David Champion, senior director of CR's Auto Test Center. "The Insight is a noisy, stiff-riding car with clumsy handling that is nothing like the Fit on which it is based. Also, Electronic Stability Control is only available on the highline EX version."
In a ratings chart of small hatchbacks and wagons, the Insight was rated 21st out of 22 vehicles, with a road test score of 54 points. It was followed by the Dodge Caliber, which scored 49.
Two new wagons, spin-offs of popular sedans -- the Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen and Hyundai Elantra Touring scored within a point of each other and received Very Good ratings, 80 and 79 respectively.
The Sportwagen, a new addition to the Jetta line, combines sound driving dynamics and more cargo and versatility than the sedan. It also imparts the feeling of a much more expensive vehicle. The Elantra Touring, also an extension to its line, is an affordable and practical vehicle with good fuel economy (26 mpg in CR's own fuel economy tests.)
Consumer Reports tested a total of six wagons and hatchbacks in the August issue including the improved Chevrolet HHR and the Pontiac Vibe (the virtual twin of the Toyota Matrix.) The Vibe will be discontinued this August given GM's decision to discontinue the Pontiac brand. Both the Vibe and the HHR received Very Good ratings. The test group also included the sporty Mazda3 hatchback, freshened with a new four-cylinder engine and new styling was also rated Very Good.
Prices ranged from $19,085 for the Pontiac to $24,730 for the Chevy HHR. All vehicles in the test proved to have average of better reliability in CR.
Consumer Reports also tested the Kia Soul. The Soul shares several of the same attributes of the small, boxy Scion xB, and was also rated Very Good. This is a new model so CR does not have any reliability data and cannot Recommend the Soul.
All vehicles in the test group are Recommended by Consumer Reports except for the Insight, which scored too low in CR's tests to be Recommended and the Soul, which does not have any reliability data yet. CR only Recommends vehicles that have performed well in its tests, have at least average predicted reliability based on CR's Annual Car Reliability Survey of its more than seven million print and web subscribers, and performed at least adequately if crash-tested or included in a government rollover test.
Full tests and ratings of the test group appear in the August issue of Consumer Reports, which goes on sale June 30. The reports are also available to subscribers of www.ConsumerReports.org.
The Honda Insight seats five and gets excellent fuel economy, but it's a noisy car with a stiff ride and clumsy handling. At its cornering limits, the Insight plows straight ahead early on in tight turns and the tail can slide out too quickly for stability control to completely prevent it. The Insight EX, ($21,790 Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price as tested), is powered by a 1.3-liter four-cylinder engine with a 13-hp electric motor combine for 98 hp that delivers 38 mpg overall. The continuously variable transmission performs smoothly. Unlike a full hybrid, the Insight requires the gas engine to turn whenever the car is moving. Braking is Very Good. Cargo space behind the rear seats is adequate.
The wagon version of the Volkswagen Jetta combines good driving dynamics and versatility with excellent fit and finish. The Jetta SE, ($24,324, MSRP as tested), is powered by a 170-hp, 2.5-liter, five-cylinder engine that delivers average performance but got only 23 mpg overall in CR's fuel economy tests. The six-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly and has a manual-override feature. Braking is Very Good. The cargo area is very spacious and you can fold down one or both sections of the rear seatbacks.
The Elantra Touring wagon is fairly roomy and versatile, with a nicely finished interior and lots of amenities for the money. The Touring's ride is noticeably stiffer than the sedan's ride, with some sharp impacts. The Elantra Touring wagon, ($19,475, MSRP as tested), is powered by a 138-hp, 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine that delivers average performance and a respectable 26-mpg overall. The four-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly and responsively. Braking is Excellent. Folding down the 60/40 seatback makes for a fairly commodious load volume.
The Mazda3 has been one of CR's top-scoring small cars for several years, distinguished by agile handling and a good-quality interior that is laid out well. The Mazda3 had a firm, compliant ride that provided good isolation from everyday road bumps. The Mazda3 s Sport, ($20,700, MSRP as tested), is powered by a 167-hp, 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine that feels smooth and refined and delivers 25 mpg overall in mixed driving. The five-speed automatic transmission shifts quickly and smoothly. Braking is Very Good. Cargo space is good behind the rear seats, and when the seatbacks are lowered the hatch encloses a good-sized cargo area.
The Pontiac Vibe is versatile, fuel-efficient, and reasonably priced. The Vibe's ride is compliant but not very steady and bumps create side-to-side rocking and even the highway ride can feel choppy. The Pontiac Vibe 1.8L, ($19,085, MSRP as tested), is powered by a 132-hp, 1.8-liter 4-cylinder engine that provides good performance and 24 mpg overall. The four-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly. Braking is Very Good. The rear is quite spacious. The cargo area is lined with hard plastic and small items slide around on it.
The Chevrolet HHR plays to 1950s design nostalgia but one drawback to its retro styling is the small and short windows, which inhibit the view out. Bumps are absorbed quite well, but the deep ruts and ridges come through as rubbery kicks. The Chevrolet HHR LT, ($24,730 MSRP), as tested is powered by a 172-hp, 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine that provides good performance and 24 mpg overall. The four-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly. Braking is Very Good. The seatbacks fold down for generous cargo space.
With more than 7 million print and online subscribers, Consumer Reports is one of the most trusted sources for information and advice on consumer products and services. It conducts the most comprehensive auto-test program of any U.S. publication or Web site; the magazine's auto experts have decades of experience in driving, testing, and reporting on cars. To become a subscriber, consumers can call 1-800-234-1645. Information and articles from the magazine can be accessed online at www.ConsumerReports.org.
AUGUST 2009
The material above is intended for legitimate news entities only; it may not be used for commercial or promotional purposes. Consumer Reports(R) is published by Consumers Union, an expert, independent nonprofit organization whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves. To achieve this mission, we test, inform, and protect. To maintain our independence and impartiality, Consumers Union accepts no outside advertising, no free test samples, and has no agenda other than the interests of consumers. Consumers Union supports itself through the sale of our information products and services, individual contributions, and a few noncommercial grants.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Nick P. 10:53AM (6/30/2009)
On the bright side, GM's Pontiac Vibe beats the Honda Insight...Yeh!
However, to be fair, they should have compared hybrids with hybrids. The Insight was designed to be an economy Hybrid, not to retain the ride quality of the Accord.
Reply
paulwesterberg 11:11AM (6/30/2009)
CR auto testing is dominated by a bunch of petrol heads who place much more emphasis on acceleration, braking, handling etc than efficiency. These are guys who race cars through obstacle courses all day. Cars that maximize efficiency use low rolling resistance tires wont be highly rated by their tests.
For instance the 2009 prius with great gas mileage and adequate acceleration gets only 68. The 2009 prius with the touring package - bigger wheels and upgraded shocks and WORSE mileage gets rated an 80. Their highest rated family sedan with 89 points is the nissan altima V6 that delivers a pathetic 23mpg.
That said I expect the ricers at CR to give a good score to the 2010 prius, despite its outstanding gas mileage given that the steering improvements and much larger engine.
Reply
luc 11:36AM (6/30/2009)
Yes so true... Part of the rating is based on power weird enough which is why very often a V6 model is higher rated than the 4cyl model (e.g. Accord/Camry). With contradicts when they keep talking about how you're better off saving money buying cheaper version with 4cyl and better FE (and don't buy a luxury brand since that's wasted money).
They contradict themselves often. They even do it in their press release: lackluster "Good". But their electronics ratings are even worse...
phez 12:32PM (6/30/2009)
What's the point in buying a car if you can't enjoy it? Sacrifice performance in the name of saving the environment? Are you one of those who enjoys driving 50 down the highway?
Gordio 2:34PM (6/30/2009)
Exactly fez. that's why i love the fit so much. i got it b/c i wanted a good economy car. little did i know how fun it was. the handling, the shifting, the mp3 player, the look, the usefulness (I can put two bikes in that thing).
after experiencing a fun car like this, i rather have a fun car than a car with good numbers. the insight could have tuned a little here and there w/ no extra cost, and it could have made the insight a great car.
mister nomer 3:05PM (6/30/2009)
paulwesterberg says: "CR auto testing is dominated by a bunch of petrol heads who place much more emphasis on acceleration, braking, handling etc than efficiency."
Consumer Reports... Petrol Heads... Really!?!? = ))
You're sure you didn't mean Road & Track, Car and Driver, Motor Trend, or Automobile Magazine?? Maybe even MotorWeek on PBS?
I gotta say, like Frank and others posting below, I've always seen CR as pretty even handed.
I suppose, in a way, you have a point in that if acceleration, braking, handling, and efficiency, each count 25% towards the rating of a car then yes that means that 75% of a car's rating is based on something other than efficiency.
But, even then, I don't think that means that "CR = petrol heads" or even that it's not a fair rating of the car. = ))
win39 11:36AM (6/30/2009)
CR has their issues like being shocked and outraged that SUVs are less stable than sedans or sports cars. Duh. Testing a hybrid against gasoline vehicles is just stupid. Real car mags have always said they would rather drive a nonhybrid. But CR in its naivete has hurt Honda with this review. Perhaps Honda, like Suzuki did, will sue. I don't think they will just go away like Isuzu did.
Interestingly there is also a comparison test in Car and Driver this month in which the Insight beats the new Prius and garnering praise for Honda's attempt to provide some kind of decent driver's experience unlike the Prius. Odd that they also complained about the subjective noise in the Insight, but the noise measurements showed the Insight to be quieter than the Prius. Sometimes objectivity is belied by measurements.
Perhaps CR will next treat us to a comparison between a Corvette and a Smart Car, two seaters that are just begging to be compared. Wonder which one they will pick.
Reply
Pierre 8:28PM (6/30/2009)
Sorry, but Consumer Reports did the right thing. I am glad they compared it to gasoline vehicles, because hybrids are intended to replace gasoline-only vehicles. Sure, hybrids belong in their own class. However, if you truly expect a common driver (who does care about performance, etc) to switch to hybrid for the fuel efficiency, it needs to be compared against similar cars in its price bracket. If CR only compared hybrids to hybrids, they would only be preaching to the "hybrid" choir. By comparing the Insight to hatchbacks, they are actually highlighting the car.
It's just Honda's fault that it received poor marks.
win39 3:14AM (7/01/2009)
I don't agree at all. Would you compare a snapshot camera to a single lens reflex, or compare sailboat to a motorboat. No. People are reasonably informed about the kind of vehicle, camera, or boat they want. They generally want a comparison within the type they are interested in. Everyone knows that a lot has been sacrificed to get 30 percent better fuel efficiency and a lot of people see that as more than OK because of the good for the planet, for the economy, and for national security.
And I was trying to point out that sometimes CR is not objective. Sometimes they are bat shxx crazy. Sometimes they do not understand what they are reviewing. All you have to do is be kind of knowledgeable about some product area and you will be amazed at how clueless they can be. That used to be very true about cars, but they have gotten a little better there. They are clueless with cameras. They are clueless with computers. Probably with other stuff too that I don't know enough about to tell.
You really have to be careful with some of these general ratings too. I have a car that is also usually rated a little noisier and stiffer riding, but to me it was worth it to get a little more responsive handling. What surprised me is that it rides better and is about the same loudness as a friends car that is commented on for its smooth and quiet ride. Some of these writers just spin a word count that has nothing to do with reality.
cwerdna 4:40AM (7/01/2009)
win39: I'm pretty sure Car and Driver made a mistake and had their noise figures for the 2010 Prius and Insight swapped. I think that they'll be publishing a correction soon.
It makes no sense that the Prius was louder in all 3 measures: idle, full throttle and 70-mph cruise when they said it was "quiet" under the highs section. For the Insight they (under lows) said "road noise" and "thrashy when thrashed".
win39 10:41AM (7/01/2009)
I doubt you will see a correction. The subjective impression of noise is what is important. The Prius may be louder, but probably more like "white noise" which does not seem noisy. Nothing stands out and it does not seem noisy. The Insight may actually be quieter, but probably some sounds stand out more and it seems noisy because you notice it. There also good noise and bad noise. I have had two noisy cars, an Alfa Romeo and a Subaru WRX, and I loved to hear them. I had a SAAB that was relatively quiet, but hated the way it sounded.
Rich 11:43AM (6/30/2009)
Sometimes I disagree with CR. But this time I agree. The Insight was at the bottom of our list too!
What I find interesting is that my 1992 Civic VX gets 43mpg in mixed driving. Better than the Insight. And my old Civic is much more fun to drive than the Insight.
Reply
Frank 11:50AM (6/30/2009)
CR presents the facts as they are and I'm never disappointed when I follow their advice or use their information as a source of comparison. Criticize their methods all you want, but the fact remains that the car did not stack up well against other in its class. It's not a coincidence that cars at the top of their ratings outsell the cars at the bottom.
It's senseless to compare cars on MPGs alone. A wise consumer takes multiple factors into consideration before plunking down thousands for any car. Seeing as how the Insight is based on the Fit, it is not unreasonable to expect that Honda would have carried over some of the positive traits; alas they did not. In this case, the $5000 premium (more or less) you pay to have an Insight earns you better MPGs and nothing else. I don't even have to do the math to know the number of years it would take to recoup that extra expenditure is NOT worth it. It's even worse when you factor the comfort, handling and versatility that you're giving up.
Reply
Saracen 12:25PM (6/30/2009)
CR is full of petrolheads? lmao.
Hardly.
I guess Clarkson was right after all, eh?
Reply
ShaunneyCakes 12:30PM (6/30/2009)
I drove one a couple of months ago and I have to agree. Honda missed BIG here... meh MPG, cramped and only just over $1,000 cheaper then the Prius. I just don't understand... if Honda was going to half-a$$ it, why not stick with the Civic which gets better MPG then this.
It is sad, I was excited about this car, but as soon as I heard the MPG and price, I bought a Prius.
Reply
cwerdna 1:41PM (6/30/2009)
(2006 Prius owner here.)
I'm not sure what you mean by "why not stick with the Civic which gets better MPG then this". CR got 38 mpg overall (29 city/45 highway) in their testing of the 2010 Insight from looking at the print version. The Civic Hybrid (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/buying-advice/most-fuelefficient-cars-206/) got 26 city/47 highway, 37 mpg overall. The non-hybrid Civic didn't even make it on the list.
When CR tested an automatic Civic non-hybrid, they got 18 city/43 highway, 28 overall. Manual got 22/40, 31 overall. How does the Civic have better mileage?
As for "just over $1000 cheaper than the Prius)", well the Insight LX starts at $19800 before dest. charge. The only currently available 2010 Prius (model II) starts at $22000, which makes it $2200 more.
Dave K. 2:15PM (6/30/2009)
Been following this for a while and see both sides. C. R. was indeed anti-hybrid biased but has been coming around of late and now rates the Prius much better than it did in 04 when I got mine, still think they're a little negative about one of the most reliable and efficient cars ever built. On the other hand Honda's hybrid system is just not as good as Toyotas (or even Ford's for that matter), and in the new Insite they cut corners to be able to undersell the Prius. I'm not really suprised it was rated poorly, Honda makes great cars, but their strong point is engine technology, not their bargain basement mild hybrid system.
Reply
locoyocal 2:53PM (6/30/2009)
The irony is that honda has anti-hybrid bias also (post 1990's). They know it is a waste of time and money, but they have to do it because idiots demand it.
Nick P. 4:35PM (6/30/2009)
Exactly what I always felt. At least in America, the GM CEO who killed the EV1 has been sacked. There's a lot of anti-hybrids & anti-EVs people left at the head of Honda and Toyota (yes, I love the Prius, but I wish they'd go EV).
These old guys are all passive-aggressive about EVs and Hybrid: they want to succeed, but they don't want to make attractive EV cars. At least, Bob Lutz is clear about his distaste for anything that isn't a muscle car.
Harlikan 11:56PM (6/30/2009)
It's not anti-hybrid bias to hold hybrids to the same standards as the vehicles we're all used to driving. Poor performance is poor performance, whether it is a hybrid or standard.
Lowering the bar and judging hybrids on lesser standard would just be an example of pro-hybrid bias. And while there's nothing wrong with being pro-hybrid, there is something wrong when a review or review methods are slanted to give hybrids higher ratings than they truly earn.
Hybrids aren't going to get better if we judge their performance with lower standards. There's nothing about hybrid or electric vehicle technology that means they have to be sluggish, slow, and a bore to drive. I think the Tesla Roadster has proven that much.
The fact is, hybrids are still in their infancy. And infancy products are almost always inferior. It takes time for technology to mature. The hybrids of today are inferior to the standard vehicles of today. And they will be vastly inferior to the hybrids that come out ten years from now. Eventually hybrid and electric technology will overtake standard vehicle engines in performance entirely. That's already possible today, just not in any profitable way.
But we aren't going to get there if we let poor performing hybrids off the hook just because they're hybrids. That's not an excuse.