Recent Topics
Vehicle Storage
by BlueOvalFitter
04/25/14 12:55 AM
Best Hand Pump
by outoforder
04/24/14 11:09 PM
vibrating 330 polaris.l
by Chris142
04/24/14 09:56 PM
4.2 liter F150 starts then dies
by 97f150
04/24/14 09:48 PM
E-mail reply from Mills on CCW policy
by The_Eric
04/24/14 09:05 PM
Laptop brand, any suggestions?
by Rat407
04/24/14 08:05 PM
Oz Natural Gas prices.
by Shannow
04/24/14 07:53 PM
R.I.P Rich Hayward
by JR
04/24/14 07:36 PM
Volvo 5.7 2008 Main rear seal leak :(
by Yannick
04/24/14 07:30 PM
Short OCI for tow
by Camprunner
04/24/14 07:21 PM
sludge 2005 pontiac vibe lk toyota corolla matrix
by kwikrnu
04/24/14 06:43 PM
Blain's Farm & Fleet 4/24-5/4/14
by BrewCityR
04/24/14 06:12 PM
Newest Members
Chevy94, ZiggyMacD, Rage2010, FenderGuy53, chevlvr
49690 Registered Users
Who's Online
12 registered (laking, Discobubba, David1, asand1, mattwithcats, 1 invisible), 642 Guests and 219 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
49690 Members
64 Forums
212376 Topics
3329577 Posts

Max Online: 2651 @ 04/21/14 04:38 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#3256158 - 01/22/14 11:47 AM Small cars and small overlap front crash test
Quattro Pete Offline


Registered: 10/30/02
Posts: 23639
Loc: Illinoistan
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/desktopnews/minicars-fall-short-for-small-overlap-frontal-protection

Good (just barely) news for Chevy Spark. Bad news for all others.

In all honesty though, even many larger cars did poorly in this test as they haven't been designed in a way to pass it. I'm sure within a few years the new designs will be introduced that will do well in this test, and the added cost will be passed on to us - the consumers.

And then IIHS will come up with yet another test that nobody can pass so that the insurance companies can hike up your rates "because your car isn't safe."
_________________________
'02 530i (PU 5W-40)
'08 C300 4Matic (M1 0W-40)
'13 F700 GS (Spectro 15W-50)

Top
#3256167 - 01/22/14 11:54 AM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
eljefino Offline


Registered: 06/15/03
Posts: 22992
Loc: ME
You said it all.

Since side impacts are safe now we're going to start ramming telegraph poles head-on again?

How about making *them* softer? Ski areas do it! LOL

Top
#3256177 - 01/22/14 12:09 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
rjundi Offline


Registered: 03/16/04
Posts: 5750
Loc: New England
This size of car class IMHO is a poor value anyway and that is too bad less safe.

The FIT for example did poorly in this test. I really don't see the value of that vehicle vs a Civic which achieves significantly better MPG, larger, better comfort and gets a good rating for the same crash test. The base price difference is $3000.

I don't get these really small cars.

Top
#3256183 - 01/22/14 12:15 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
stranger706 Offline


Registered: 04/24/09
Posts: 815
Loc: Gulf Coast
The last paragraph from the article -

"Frontal crash tests like these only indicate how a car will perform in a crash with a similarly-sized vehicle. In real life, however, cars this size are much more likely to hit a larger vehicle, the Institute pointed out. Insurance Institute crash tests have indicated that, in crashes between larger and smaller vehicles, occupants in the smaller vehicle will suffer significantly greater injuries.

"These cars have an inherent safety disadvantage in many kinds of crashes," Insurance Institute spokesman Russ Rader said."

Top
#3256200 - 01/22/14 12:23 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
dparm Offline


Registered: 04/19/10
Posts: 11812
Loc: Lombard, IL
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete

In all honesty though, even many larger cars did poorly in this test as they haven't been designed in a way to pass it.



Your choice of words is interesting. Are we designing cars merely to pass the test, or to be safe? If the car is protecting the passengers, it should be able to pass the test...it's not supposed to be the other way around.
_________________________
2011.5 BMW M3 saloon ZCP
der stärkste buchstabe der welt
Mobil 1 0w40 + Mahle OX 254D3

Top
#3256201 - 01/22/14 12:24 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
RISUPERCREWMAN Offline


Registered: 07/29/08
Posts: 615
Loc: RHODE ISLAND
Whether I'm driving my 2011 Crown Vic or 08 F-150 I feel safe! Small cars are for the birds!
_________________________
2012 Ram Express 5.7 HEMI 2wd short bed 23k miles
2012 Harley Davidson FLHX Vivid Black 10K
2011 Ford Crown Victoria 55K miles Stainless works duals

Top
#3256207 - 01/22/14 12:27 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: dparm]
Quattro Pete Offline


Registered: 10/30/02
Posts: 23639
Loc: Illinoistan
Originally Posted By: dparm
Are we designing cars merely to pass the test, or to be safe?

Good question. How do we determine if a car is safe? Typically we determine this by looking at how it did in one test or another because this data is readily available.

Sure, you could search for fatality and injury rates instead, but since these accidents happen in uncontrolled environments, you never know if you're comparing apples to apples.
_________________________
'02 530i (PU 5W-40)
'08 C300 4Matic (M1 0W-40)
'13 F700 GS (Spectro 15W-50)

Top
#3256224 - 01/22/14 12:35 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
VNTS Offline


Registered: 03/01/07
Posts: 1200
Loc: NE
saw this on the morning news, guy said the Fit is a basically a death trap.

Top
#3256232 - 01/22/14 12:43 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
surfstar Offline


Registered: 09/16/04
Posts: 4066
Loc: Santa Barbara, CA
How does this relate to past "car-size classes"?

Remember how the Civic now-a-days is larger than an Accord from the past? e.g. - the Fit/Versa were designed to fill the void by the Civic/Sentra as they continued to grow with each redesign.

A Tacoma is much bigger than it used to be. Eventually we'll all be driving tanks.

I'm assuming a 2014 Fit is safer than a 1988 Accord, so at what point is it 'good enough'?
_________________________
2000 Civic HX 1.6L MTX ~41mpg
2005 Saturn Vue 2.2L MTX ~27mpg
--My 'new' car is an early retirement--

Top
#3256236 - 01/22/14 12:45 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: dparm]
IndyIan Offline


Registered: 09/23/08
Posts: 5024
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete

In all honesty though, even many larger cars did poorly in this test as they haven't been designed in a way to pass it.



Your choice of words is interesting. Are we designing cars merely to pass the test, or to be safe? If the car is protecting the passengers, it should be able to pass the test...it's not supposed to be the other way around.

I think the criteria of the test is passenger safety. Nothing else determines the rating I believe.
It is an odd test though, they don't "pad" the barrier to simulate hitting another car.
Overall though, I don't see a big problem with adding additional safety tests. Probably this small offset one isn't even a big challenge to figure out. I imagine at some point they will add air bags on the outside of the car which might cost a little to figure out. But 2 feet of controlled decelleration would go along way to reduce the structural requirements of the actual car to be safe and may even save money?
_________________________
07 Focus ZXW, 5spd manual, 80km M1 5W20
03 Tracker, 5spd manual, 250km, Valvoline Syn 5W30
95 Neon, 3spd auto, 282km, RT6 5W40 "Cone Killer!"

Top
#3256239 - 01/22/14 12:46 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: surfstar]
cptbarkey Offline


Registered: 02/27/12
Posts: 1097
Loc: texas
Originally Posted By: surfstar
at what point is it 'good enough'?


when there is no more inherit conflict of interest.

case in point: ban all pickup trucks and large SUVs from public highways. grin
_________________________
2011 toyota sienna
2000 subaru outback
2005 subaru legacy gt (project)
1995 chevy camaro z28 (project)
1997 honda accord ex (project)

Top
#3256245 - 01/22/14 12:48 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
shDK Offline


Registered: 04/03/13
Posts: 453
Loc: Denmark
It did below average in the euroNCAP test back in 09 aswell. There are however several good examples of minecars that did well in the euroNCAP.

Renault ZOE and Audi a1 Are Good examples.

Top
#3256252 - 01/22/14 12:52 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
dparm Offline


Registered: 04/19/10
Posts: 11812
Loc: Lombard, IL
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: dparm
Are we designing cars merely to pass the test, or to be safe?

Good question. How do we determine if a car is safe? Typically we determine this by looking at how it did in one test or another because this data is readily available.

Sure, you could search for fatality and injury rates instead, but since these accidents happen in uncontrolled environments, you never know if you're comparing apples to apples.



I'm not saying the tests aren't necessary. I just don't like the idea that cars are designed to pass the test. A standard is still a necessity to compare vehicle safety.

There have been many vehicles over the years (Volvo, hint hint) that were so safe to begin with that they were passing the tests before they were even required. That is a sign of good engineering and prioritizing safety. I think this philosophy is applicable in many areas of engineering and design.
_________________________
2011.5 BMW M3 saloon ZCP
der stärkste buchstabe der welt
Mobil 1 0w40 + Mahle OX 254D3

Top
#3256266 - 01/22/14 01:01 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: dparm]
Quattro Pete Offline


Registered: 10/30/02
Posts: 23639
Loc: Illinoistan
Originally Posted By: dparm
That is a sign of good engineering and prioritizing safety. I think this philosophy is applicable in many areas of engineering and design.

I agree. But this costs money, so many economy-tier car manufacturers won't go out of their way and over-engineer on safety unless some test makes them look bad.

Then there is the separate issue of the test's validity. Is it really reflective of some real-life scenario and what is the likelihood of its occurrence? Designing cars is about compromises - you can't have it all and still meet a given price point that will assure sufficient demand. So I can't necessarily blame the engineers either.
_________________________
'02 530i (PU 5W-40)
'08 C300 4Matic (M1 0W-40)
'13 F700 GS (Spectro 15W-50)

Top
#3256271 - 01/22/14 01:04 PM Re: Small cars and small overlap front crash test [Re: Quattro Pete]
eljefino Offline


Registered: 06/15/03
Posts: 22992
Loc: ME
Everything's a compromise. Mercedes got flamed 20 years ago because their cars didn't crumple "as much" in our 30 mph brick-wall test, and the occupants felt more decelleration than they otherwise would have-- even though they were "safe". Merc pointed out that head-on crashes were often one corner and they were glad to be stiffer.

Did you know seat belts have some stretch built in? This helps in the vast majority of crashes but is a compromise in the super high speed doozie ones.

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >