I also found a bunch of old CR magazines at an estate sale (They said I could have them if I carried them out of the basement!). These were mostly from the 70s.
I would term most of the information as useless. For example, if you cannot decide for yourself whether you prefer secondary user controls on the side, or in plain view; you are an idiot. During a review of 70s luxury coupes, (Monte Carlo, Cordoba, T-bird) they began the article by implying that any one who would suffer the inconveince of a two door model over the ease of a sedan is just someone who needs an ego boost. How's that for unbiased?
Note that the TV review makes no mention of the handwired chassis, and its advantages over PC boards. They also seem to think a CRT-killing "quick warm-up" feature is a plus, in the middle of an energy crisis!
It's so glaringly obvious that CR is written by those who know very little about the technology of what they are testing. This really comes out during their automotive reviews, which fail to distinguish between a serious defect, or a paint scratch.
If you'd like to read about the statistical problems with CR's reader surveys, click the link below. Although it deals largely with automobiles, I believe the same biased mindset applies to all of their testing.
http://www.allpar.com/cr.html
Also note that CR, those advocates of consumer rights and presumably free speech, like to sue the hell out of anyone who dares to say something negative about their magazine; saying that any type of quote is a violation of copyright laws. While I understand this zealous approach if their quotes were used for advertising, keep in mind that they also sue anyone who dares to question their testing techniques, and mentions specific results.