The Safest, Used Mid Sized (Used) Car Is?

[Best F100]

We don't talk much about auto safety and crashworthiness here. So I thought i'd bring it up. Within the next year, I may be looking for a used, second or third vehicle. Kind of a "squirrel tough" vehicle that, (not overcoming the laws of physics), is able to "take a hit" from a larger, pickup or SUV sized vehicle without suffering considerable interior damage. This vehicle would be used by teenagers in my house. No room for Crown Vic sized vehicles in my driveway. Also, a new car is not in my budget.

Back in the 1980's, Volvo used to be that "go to" vehicle of choice. Some of you also may remember their advertising of their roof strength pillars. For those of you too young to remember, they ran ads showing 6 Volvos stacked vertically on their roofs. The bottom vehicle showed no signs of collapse. Impressive advertising! I wonder why no one does the same thing today?

So two question todays:
1) What used, midsize vehicle have YOU seen, or experienced, has a safety cage built robust enough that the
passengers walked away from a massive hit from a larger vehicle?

2) Would you feel safer in a old Volvo or Saab, than in today's mid sized or smaller sedans?

 

[Reggaemon]

Subaru always does good in crash tests.
I would not feel as safe in an old Volvo or Saab unless they had all the airbags modern cars have.

 

[KD0AXS]

Just the other day I drove past an accident scene where a Ford Focus had been broadsided by a semi. The impact had thrown the car about 75 feet back from the intersection, and the car was completely demolished. The driver had serious injuries, but survived.

 

[sicko]

Originally Posted By: Reggaemon
Subaru always does good in crash tests.
I would not feel as safe in an old Volvo or Saab unless they had all the airbags modern cars have.


I was thinking Subaru as I read the original message. Subaru have good crash test results, they're reliable so there's less chance of being broken down on the side of the road, plus the AWD gives the vehicle better grip in rain and other inclement weather.

 

[czbrian]

Pretty much any newer vehicle is going to be safer. A new compact car will be safer than a truck from 10-15 years ago. I always refer people to this website when evaluating what vehicle to purchase since it is the most objective source you will likely be able to find..

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings

 

[MCompact]

Yes, if I can't run my new car into a telephone pole at 40 mph, I'll look elsewhere...

 

[columnshift]

You cant overcome physics... it's important to remember that things like 35mph crashes are chosen because they are a reasonable compromise, at 45mph you're in alot more trouble for instance. Despite the 'compact safer than a pickup years ago' in vehicle vs vehicle crashes heavier vehicles fare better, and modern vehicles are total fatties. :- P My 20 year old pickup head-onning your 2020 yugo is still going to leave you the worse off, not me. But modern midsizes are about like fullsizes of years ago, and compacts approach midsizes in weight - everything has gained a thousand pounds it seems.

If you can fit a minivan those tend to be surprisingly heavy and dense for the length (comparable to fullsize cars now) - they also seriously dissuade junior's racerboy tendencies because they wont want to show off.

Sitting up high also gives a better view of the traffic situation. This is an alternative if a shorter SUV is not possible.


Beyond crash physics, and without wanting to put in a rollcage or get advanced driver training or something, most of the modern crash ratings should be fairly self explanatory and there should be a number of options. Safety features like skid control can definately help and are more useful to untrained drivers as well.


If it was me and my kids i'd probably invest in advanced driver training first of some sort. Learning to control the car better and be more aware of surroundings is the first step to not having an accident in the first place.

 

[901Memphis]

Not sure what year you're looking for but here is the 2006 list and you should be able to change just the year in the address bar and see others

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/TSP-List/2006

The Saab 9-3 and Subaru Legacy are the only gold picks for 2006 midsized

The larger Ford 500 and Mercury Montego are gold picks for full sized

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: Best F100
1) What used, midsize vehicle have YOU seen, or experienced, has a safety cage built robust enough that the
passengers walked away from a massive hit from a larger vehicle?

If you're talking about, say, a 30-40 MPH collision from a small-ish SUV or truck, just about any car made by any reputable manufacturer in the past few years can take that. Not a lot of exceptions, honestly.

If you're talking a faster hit from a bigger SUV, not a lot is going to make a difference. If nothing else, the passengers will be thrown around so bad that the integrity of the passenger cell won't make much of a difference.

Also, you mentioned a budget but you never said what it was. All we know is that the car has to be used, you want it to take a hit, and it has to be smaller than a Crown Vic. So far, that covers just about everything from a 2014 Mercedes C-Class on down. Could we narrow it down a bit?


Originally Posted By: Best F100
2) Would you feel safer in a old Volvo or Saab, than in today's mid sized or smaller sedans?

Given an age gap of 5 years, maybe. 10 or more, no.

 

[Boomer]

What Columnshift says.... He is right on. Kinetic energy goes up with the square of speed so a 30 mph vehicle has a relative energy of 900 while a 60 mph vehicle has a relative energy of 3600, 4 times as much. For a head on collision, add the two speeds together and square that number. You'll see why those are so deadly.

 

[earlyre]

while definitely not mid sized, the Current Gen(2011+) Explorer, in police trim, is rated to withstand (ie: passenger cell intact) a 75MPH rear impact (as in the explorer is parked on the side of the road, and some doofus slams into it @70mph)

the only difference structurally between the police, and civilian models that makes this possible, is a steel X Brace, that bolts into the same mounting points as the 3rd row seats. (if you look around, the braces are available)

now, this crash rating is only in effect with the brace, AND the spare tire in its well.

Taurus interceptor also has the same setup, so you should be able to add a brace to any 2010+ Taurus for the same rating.
and no, it's not midsized either...

but...ok... no room in your drive for something that large.. how about a Smart Car? couple years back they had a series of ads with a Ford Expedition sitting atop the "tridion safety cell" kinda like those old Volvo ads mentioned above..

 

[AZjeff]

You prefer anecdotal "evidence" over published crash test data?

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: AZjeff
You prefer anecdotal "evidence" over published crash test data?

I had the same thought at first.

Obviously the guy is just looking for a safe car that isn't big and won't break the bank. I'm sure we can handle that much without getting into the epistemological weeds.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: earlyre
while definitely not mid sized, the Current Gen(2011+) Explorer, in police trim, is rated to withstand (ie: passenger cell intact) a 75MPH rear impact (as in the explorer is parked on the side of the road, and some doofus slams into it @70mph)

the only difference structurally between the police, and civilian models that makes this possible, is a steel X Brace, that bolts into the same mounting points as the 3rd row seats. (if you look around, the braces are available)

now, this crash rating is only in effect with the brace, AND the spare tire in its well.

Taurus interceptor also has the same setup, so you should be able to add a brace to any 2010+ Taurus for the same rating.
and no, it's not midsized either...

Not that I'd endorse these cars for the OP (or an Explorer for just about anyone), but this is fascinating!

Are you sure the brace is the only difference? Nothing in the way the unibody is put together, etc.?

 

[hattaresguy]

Saab's are always a good choice as are Volvo's. As for affordable and kind of slow but safe teen cars an E320/E350 4matic is hard to beat.

On of my friends just bought his 17 year old an E320, great car. The kid promptly let his friend drive it and smashed the [censored] out of it into a telephone pole. Everyone was Ok, Mercedes builds one [censored] of a car.

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

Mid size reliable used car that is safe? Tough to beat a subaru legacy.

Jeff

 

[eljefino]

The newer cars are so frightfully heavier than their identical name-sakes twenty years prior. Even something like a (shudder) malibu would be a good choice.

My 1983 Mercedes looks the part, with absurd US-market 5 MPH bumpers, but its side impact skills surely leaves something to be desired. However newer Mercs depreciate in free-fall so if you find an eight year old one for 10% of new price, snag it, and hold on to your wallet for repairs, or teach the kids how to spin a wrench.

 

[sciphi]

2011-2012 Cruze LS. Same size as a mid-size car of 10 years ago and has a zillion airbags. Great crash-test ratings, and can take a hit from a larger vehicle like a champ. Insurance is cheap on the things as a result. There are also a zillion of them running around, so spare parts are plentiful and will remain so for years.

 

[Y_K]

Seventh grade Physics: Mass and Inertia.
All those vertical load gimmicks with Volvo and Smart are irrelevant. T-bone, rear-end and head-on are the real opportunities to say hello to our heavenly parents.
Defensive driving courses are easy and cheap.

 

[earlyre]

Originally Posted By: Y_K
Seventh grade Physics: Mass and Inertia.
All those vertical load gimmicks with Volvo and Smart are irrelevant. T-bone, rear-end and head-on are the real opportunities to say hello to our heavenly parents.
Defensive driving courses are easy and cheap.

very true. a while back Fifth Gear Crashed a Smart into a concrete barrier @ 70mph. the car, while obviously smashed up, survived with minimal deviation to the safety cell. so from that standpoint yay!, but the force of the impact, and the instant deceleration (70-0) would be fatal in themselves.
it was the kind of wreck you could walk away from...if you weren't already dead.