Why Suzuki took Consumer Reports to court over its testing – Jalopnik

Consumer Reports’ results can sometimes be quite damning. The publication is known for its impartiality, and that can lead to negative press. For example, we covered 67 used models that you shouldn’t buy, according to Consumer Reports.

Now automakers should expect bad press; after all, not everyone will like everything you produce. Whether it’s finicky infotainment systems or controversial styling, they have to take the rough with the smooth. However, when Consumer Reports claimed that the then-new Suzuki Samurai was at risk of falling over, the Japanese company simply wasn’t having it.

This was the late 1980s, when the model was new to the American public, and as a smaller Japanese automaker trying to compete among the bigger players, Suzuki felt it had to fight back. Sales had initially been strong, with Suzuki reportedly selling two Samurais for every Jeep Wrangler in 1987, but when Consumer Reports declared the Samurai easily toppled the following year, sales plummeted.

Suzuki responded by taking Consumer Reports to court, and over the years evidence emerged indicating that the tests conducted by Consumer Reports were unfair. The Samurai proved difficult to overturn even at higher speeds, and Suzuki argued that the publication’s driver turned more aggressively at speed than any normal driver would to induce a roll.

The same was said about the Isuzu Trooper at the time, and sales fell there too. Isuzu even withdrew from the US altogether in 2008 due to a lack of sales and profitability. Was Consumer Reports partially responsible for this? It’s unclear, but the reports of rollovers certainly haven’t helped Isuzu and Suzuki.

Ultimately, Suzuki and Consumers Union agreed to dismiss the lawsuit and mutually respect each other’s position. Suzuki agreed to recognize Consumers Union’s commitment to objective and unbiased reporting, while Consumers Union recognized Suzuki’s commitment to designing, manufacturing and marketing safe vehicles.

Suzuki wasn’t the only party upset by Consumer Reports’ rollover tests. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHSTA) had stated in the past that the way Consumer Reports conducted its testing was flawed. The NHSTA uses robots to test a vehicle’s rollover tendencies, while Consumer Reports uses a driver – which allows for much more variation in the test, such as how hard they pull on the steering wheel.

Suzuki also took issue with the way Consumer Reports stated its findings, saying the Samurai could “easily” take turns. The use of “easily” implied that the Samurai could fall over under normal driving conditions, which both parties said was not Consumer Reports’ intention.

Although the report was eventually removed from the Consumer Reports site, the damage had already been done and Suzuki felt sales were suffering. Neither really won here. Instead, Suzuki lost sales from a previously high-performing model, and Consumer Reports questioned its integrity as a publication. Ultimately, the Samurai ended up as one of the discontinued off-roaders that deserves a modern revival.