Neon bombs...

BigJon · 03-08-2005, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Small Cars Fare Poorly in Latest Crash Tests

DETROIT (Reuters) - Most small cars, including some equipped with side airbags, fared poorly in the latest side impact crash tests conducted by a U.S. research group with links to the insurance industry.

In a report issued late on Sunday, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (news - web sites) said only Toyota Motor Corp. (news - web sites)'s Corolla and the Chevrolet Cobalt from General Motors Corp. performed well enough to earn its second-highest rating of "acceptable."

Both were equipped with optional side airbags in the tests after getting "poor" ratings in earlier side impact crash tests without them.

Other small cars all earned "poor" ratings in the latest tests, which simulate the force from the front end of a typical pickup truck or sport utility vehicle when it slams into the driver's side of a passenger vehicle at 31 miles per hour.

Adrian Lund, the Insurance Institute's chief operating officer, said the least crashworthy of the vehicles was the aging Dodge Neon from DaimlerChrysler AG's U.S.-based Chrysler unit.

"This car is a disaster," Lund said of the Neon, which was tested without side airbags.

Lund noted that the Neon had also received the third-lowest rating of "marginal" in an earlier frontal crash test conducted by the Insurance Institute.

"If safety is a priority, the Neon is a small car to be avoided," he said.

Other vehicles tested by the Insurance Institute, with or without side airbags and earning "poor" ratings for side impact, include:

-- Ford Motor Co.'s Focus (without optional airbags).

-- Mazda Motor Corp. (news - web sites)'s Mazda 3 (without optional airbags).

-- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. (news - web sites) Lancer (without optional airbags)

-- The Saturn Ion from GM (with optional airbags).

-- Volkswagen AG's New Beetle (with standard airbags).

-- Suzuki Motor Corp.'s Aerio and Forenza (both with standard airbags).

-- Nissan Motor Co., Sentra (without optional airbags).

-- Kia Motors Corp. Spectra (with standard airbags)

-- Hyundai Motor Co. Ltd.'s Elantra (with standard airbags).

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...s_crashtest_dc
These side impact crashes are getting more and more testing. What's interesting is that the "optional airbags" are optional....shouldn't they just make those standard?

Jeffbx · 03-08-2005, 07:39 AM

I don't know... I think these tests are very misleading. Just FUD from the insurance industry.

Let's take a *very* specific test - a large SUV or pickup truck heading into the side of a small economy car at 31MPH - and draw some very poor conclusions from it. Not safe! DUH - those are small cars being t-boned by big trucks. I doubt very many small cars would get a good rating from that!

When I see any research like that, the first thing I look at is who paid for it. If it was the insurance industry (and 99% of them are), all it is is another excuse to raise premiums.

YES, I agree that some good safety features were forced onto the MFRs by the insurance industry - shoulder/lap belts, airbags, 5 MPH bumpers - but let's be realistic here, folks. The auto insurance companies don't fund these tests out of the goodness of their hearts. They're getting a return from them.

"OK, Ms. Jones, I see you've purchased a new Neon! Yes, we can insure it for you, but based on poor performance from the latest crash data on that car being run over by a cement mixer at 47MPH on an icy road, we're going to have to charge you a little more in your premiums."

On a related note, ever noticed that every single study on the 'dangers' of speeding is done by the insurance industry? It's not a safety issue - that's a revenue issue, too.

thekidrocks · 03-08-2005, 07:39 AM

The Neon has been a great example of a cute little car that sells for cheap... and still isn't worth it. Beyond safety issues, there was the engine failure issue - which seems to be becoming a common DC problem with other engines.

bachviet · 03-08-2005, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigJon

<SNIP>
These side impact crashes are getting more and more testing. What's interesting is that the "optional airbags" are optional....shouldn't they just make those standard?
[/size][/font]

Those are optional side airbags not driver and passenger airbags. Honda is the only company that offers side airbags in all models (2005+ or 2006+) as standard features.

That's why my next car is going to be a Honda.

brainsmile · 03-08-2005, 10:37 AM

what do you currently drive?

psycho- · 03-08-2005, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffbx

I don't know... I think these tests are very misleading. Just FUD from the insurance industry.

Let's take a *very* specific test - a large SUV or pickup truck heading into the side of a small economy car at 31MPH - and draw some very poor conclusions from it. Not safe! DUH - those are small cars being t-boned by big trucks. I doubt very many small cars would get a good rating from that!

When I see any research like that, the first thing I look at is who paid for it. If it was the insurance industry (and 99% of them are), all it is is another excuse to raise premiums.

I for one am one of those who do not believe such tests are misleading. A study has shown that SUV-car incompatibilities in accidents can raise the death of car passengers by a factor of 30. In other words, if a SUV T-boned you, you are 30 times more likely to die than if a Ford Taurus T-boned you.

You factor in that approx of 50% of vehicles sold in the 50 states have been SUVs w/ a GVW over 4000 lbs. The IIHS website states "The test configuration resulting from this research is a 31 mph (50 km/h) perpendicular impact into the driver side of a passenger vehicle. The moving deformable barrier that strikes the test vehicle weighs 3,300 pounds (1,500 kg) and has a front end shaped to simulate the typical front end of a pickup or SUV." That's nearly 700 lbs lighter than the standard GVW of an average mid-size SUV.

http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_rat...ide_impact.htm

The second factor is the relevancy of the IIHS. The IIHS can be decidedly one of the important factors (along with EURO-NCAP, JNCAP, and AU NCAP) that pushed for more stringent testing of offset impact testing. If you look at the IIHS website (www.hwysafety.org) and browse "discontiuned" cars in the testing region, you will invariably see that vehicles have improved dramatically over time. Car companies have dramatically improved cars' structures since the advent of the offset test; and now on average have lowered frontal accident death rates.

Finally, I think you're trivializing the effectiveness of this test and side impact airbags. I think more than anything, the IIHS Is "shaming" car companies to include Side impact airbags into the vehicles, and also to inform drivers about the effectiveness of Side impact bags.

As quoted by this article: http://www.hwysafety.org/news_releas...3/pr082603.htm

Quote:

estimate side airbag effectiveness in on-the-road crashes, Institute researchers used data from the federal Fatality Analysis Reporting System and General Estimates System to compute the relative risk of dying for drivers of 1997-2002 car models with and without side airbags when their vehicles were struck on the left (driver) side. Besides computing the overall effectiveness estimates -- 45 percent fatality risk reduction for drivers of cars with head-protecting side airbags, 11 percent reduction with torso-only side airbags

This shows impact criteria used in certain side impact tests showing it's effectiveness:
http://www.hwysafety.org/news_releas...0/pr121400.htm

In fact, I wouldn't recommend any car w/o these things to anyone looking for a new car.

The bottom line is that if you're even just driving a compact car; having those extra airbags will be the difference between life and death if someone hits you from the side (refer to Red light running thread)

attgig · 03-08-2005, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bachviet

Those are optional side airbags not driver and passenger airbags. Honda is the only company that offers side airbags in all models (2005+ or 2006+) as standard features.

That's why my next car is going to be a Honda.

didn't hyundai do that a few years ago? or was it kia.... i dunno, but i remember one of the korean budget makers made that standard.

BigJon · 03-08-2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brainsmile

what do you currently drive?

Old '94 Bonneville and a '91 Astro Van (with no airbags)

KCEnder · 03-08-2005, 04:44 PM

05 acura tsx, i have so many airbags it's insane. i have a feeling that if they were to deploy all at once, it would total my car just in the value of having to replace the things.

BigJon · 03-08-2005, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCEnder

05 acura tsx, i have so many airbags it's insane. i have a feeling that if they were to deploy all at once, it would total my car just in the value of having to replace the things.

Anybody remember the scene in Demolition Man where he crashes the cop car and it ejects the "safety foam"?

Jeffbx · 03-09-2005, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psycho-

Relevant & interesting stuff

OK, I absolutely concede that cars are WAY safer than they were even 10 years ago. But where do we draw the line on making cars more crash-proof, and focus instead on driver safety & responsibility? I don't want to think of a crash as an inevitable occurrence, so I'd better have 5-point harnesses & 37 air bags. I'd rather see us focusing on the root of the problem, which is unsafe drivers. If they were really concerned about safety, they would be focusing on PREVENTING accidents, not making it safer to have accidents.

Here's what I would like to see:

- Young drivers that need a practice period before earning an unrestricted license - daytime driving only, an adult in the car, etc. Some states are doing this already
- Road tests every year once you turn 65
- Automatic license revocation for driving under the influence
- Harsher penalties for driving with a revoked/suspended license, jail time for multiple offenses
- Much more stringent driving & written tests to get a license

In some states (Michigan is one), pretty much all you need is a pulse & a pencil to fill out the forms to get a drivers license. Bad drivers are everywhere, but that doesn't seem to be as hot of an issue as making sure big SUVs can run into small cars safely.

bachviet · 03-09-2005, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffbx

... If they were really concerned about safety, they would be focusing on PREVENTING accidents, not making it safer to have accidents.

...

But since that is not going to happen anytime soon, I rather have a safe car for my family especially with my little girl on board. It's the next best thing since there are more bad drivers in CA than Michigan.

psycho- · 03-09-2005, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bachviet

But since that is not going to happen anytime soon, I rather have a safe car for my family especially with my little girl on board. It's the next best thing since there are more bad drivers in CA than Michigan.

I agree......people here treat driving as a right (when it's actually a privilege). Hence the stupidity you see on the road. Stricter laws regarding moving violations, DWIs, etc while good; will generally be met with resentment and suspicion in the US.

So, in the end, it's a hard thing to push; though I fully agree with you. So, while I can control myself; I'm pretty much worrying about other people on the road who can affect me. Safety is still good.

03-08-2005, 10:37 AM	#5
brainsmile Chief of Naval Operations Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: woah... why is welfareloser here with me so early in the morning and more importantly why am I wearing her clothes?!? Posts: 13,754	what do you currently drive? __________________ ********************************** DCM #1 (Founder) "Nobody beats Vitus Gerulaitis 18 times in a row." - Vitus Gerulaitis on beating Jimmy Connors after 17 failed attempts.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-08-2005, 07:39 AM	#2
Jeffbx Fleet Admiral Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Michigan Posts: 9,390	I don't know... I think these tests are very misleading. Just FUD from the insurance industry. Let's take a very specific test - a large SUV or pickup truck heading into the side of a small economy car at 31MPH - and draw some very poor conclusions from it. Not safe! DUH - those are small cars being t-boned by big trucks. I doubt very many small cars would get a good rating from that! When I see any research like that, the first thing I look at is who paid for it. If it was the insurance industry (and 99% of them are), all it is is another excuse to raise premiums. YES, I agree that some good safety features were forced onto the MFRs by the insurance industry - shoulder/lap belts, airbags, 5 MPH bumpers - but let's be realistic here, folks. The auto insurance companies don't fund these tests out of the goodness of their hearts. They're getting a return from them. "OK, Ms. Jones, I see you've purchased a new Neon! Yes, we can insure it for you, but based on poor performance from the latest crash data on that car being run over by a cement mixer at 47MPH on an icy road, we're going to have to charge you a little more in your premiums." On a related note, ever noticed that every single study on the 'dangers' of speeding is done by the insurance industry? It's not a safety issue - that's a revenue issue, too.

03-08-2005, 07:39 AM	#3
thekidrocks Lieutenant Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Northen Indiana Posts: 357	The Neon has been a great example of a cute little car that sells for cheap... and still isn't worth it. Beyond safety issues, there was the engine failure issue - which seems to be becoming a common DC problem with other engines.

03-08-2005, 04:44 PM	#9
KCEnder Lieutenant Junior Grade Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 69	05 acura tsx, i have so many airbags it's insane. i have a feeling that if they were to deploy all at once, it would total my car just in the value of having to replace the things.

User Name
Password
Remember Me?