I've had a lot of issues with Consumer Reports over the years, and things haven't changed.
Of late, they've been putting out a lot of web stuff with top 10 or top 20 and the like.
Today I saw one for the quickest and slowest 0 - 60 times.
Well, they had a few GMs and a lot of European and Japanese brands. They had Camaro, but no Mustang -- hmmm. I checked around and the Mustang was showing 0 - 60 numbers as good or better than the Camaro ( as I thought). And the Camaro was not at the top or bottom, but somewhere in the middle of their list.
So, it was just pretty much BS, as a lot of their stuff seems to be.
I've been carrying mail for nearly 10 years and I've watched their subscription sales in the mail drop hugely. I used to purchase everything based on a consumer reports article, that was til they said that a family would be better buying a Prius for over 24K than another smaller car for around 15K. I think they are out of touch with American pay vs cost of living.
Their reviews of paints and stains pretty much did it for me, since I have (a lot of) experience in that area. What they were rating as tops was overpriced, and a major pain in the rear to use. One paint in particular that they rated very well had a tendency to both drag (not brush easily) and sag (run after application), which are normally mutually exclusive traits in a paint. CR doesn't fully explain their test methods with paints, but I suspect that they don't apply them as they would be by homeowners and pros in the field. In other words, I suspect they apply them by machine to get a consistent "wet-mil thickness", rather than by typical brush, roll and spray (and exterior paints that are sprayed need to be back-brushed if applied to an absorbant substrate like wood).