That’s right, I can’t stand Consumers Union (CU).  Through their Consumer Reports magazine, they judge products and decide what the American public should buy.  But, what if they are wrong, or worse, what if they have a bias against a particular product?  Who sits in judgment to determine whether CU was correct?  The answer is no one!  And, believe me, they do have biases.

That is exactly what happened when they killed the Suzuki Samurai.  All they needed to do was hold a press conference and declare that the Samurai “rolls over easily” and that then sparked the sale of their next Consumer Reports issue that declared the Samurai sport utility vehicle (SUV) was “not acceptable.” 

The product liability lawyers who financially support CU love such issues.  They immediately started suing Suzuki.  The news media, who never questions CU carried the CU/Samurai story and all of the evening news channels were showing the Samurai up on two wheels.  Sales for the Samurai dropped from 81,000 in 1987 to just 5,000 two years later.

The CU report came out in 1988.  And, believe me, no investigative reporter was digging into how the testing of the Samurai was conducted.  Eight years later, when Consumer Reports, in an anniversary issue, celebrated the demise of the Samurai, George Ball, General Counsel  for American Suzuki decided to sue CU for defamation and product disparagement.  George took over in 1993 when the company was being devastated by Samurai law suits.  All the expensive pretrial discovery was done and then the cases would be settled.  George told me, “Jack, we are being raped by the plaintiff attorneys and fondled by the defense attorneys.”

George decided to fight back.  He assembled a strong defense team which would take certain selected cases to trial.  I was fortunate to be part of the team providing advice on National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues.  Of the four Samurai  cases Suzuki took to trial, they won three of them.  Cale Yarbough, a NASCAR champion, testified that the Samurai had excellent stability.  In fact, he had one he used on his farm.  The plaintiff lawyers moved elsewhere.  It became too expensive and time consuming to sue Suzuki.

So in 1996, after suing CU and going through discovery, Suzuki finally found out how the Samurai was tested and how CU got it up on two wheels.  CU went into the testing convinced that the Samurai would fail.  Many of the CU VIPs came out to the track to watch the Samurai fail.  The problem was it didn’t.  It reminds me of the Northern aristocrats who brought their basket lunches out to watch the North rout the South at the
first Battle of Bull Run.

CU’s two professional drivers drove the little SUV through CU’s accident avoidance course (the same course they had used to test previous SUVs).  The Samurai preformed outstandingly!  All 37 test runs were successful.  The professional test drivers gave the Samurai high scores.  The CU leadership was frustrated and allegedly comments were made about the need to tip up the Samurai.  Then a non-professional executive for CU, David Pittle, got behind the wheel.  His first nine runs went smoothly.  Then, on his 10th run, Pittle took one turn too wide and in trying to get back on course, the Samurai tipped up on two wheels.  Later watching and listening to the video tape, it was easy to hear those present cheering.  Needless to say, that was the end of the testing for the day.

The CU staff then studied how Pittle (I pronounce it, Piddle) got the Samurai up on two wheels.  They saw where he made his mistakes.  Then, taking that information, they modified the obstacle course so as to insure the Samurai would fail.  I said they gamed the test.  George Ball said they rigged the test.  Whatever you call it, it was despicable.  Then with the “modified accident avoidance course,” they ran the Samurai to its preordained tip up.  It took a number of runs to tip it up, but they got it there.  And, that was what everyone saw on the evening news.

The Center for Auto Safety, which has obvious links with CU, petitioned NHTSA to have the Samurai declared defective.  NHTSA turned them down.  NHTSA also mentioned that CU’s so called “accident avoidance maneuver” test did not have a scientific basis (we subsequently learned that in spades) and could not be linked to real world crash avoidance needs, or actual crash data.

Now you know why I have no use for Consumers Union or Consumer Reports.  I think what they did was corrupt and no one would have ever known if Suzuki hadn’t sued.  How many other Samurai cases are out there that no one knows about?  How did the law suit come out?  It went on for years.  The trial judge kept dismissing the case and the Federal Appeals Court (in California, no less) would reverse and reinstate the case for trial.  It eventually settled.  I am not privy to the terms of the settlement.  If I were, I wouldn’t be able to tell you.

So because of my strong contempt for Consumers Union, life is more of a struggle.  I can’t use  Consumer Reports as a crutch when I need to buy a new toaster or ice cream maker.  I will probably survive.