ZUKIWORLD Online | Suzuki 4x4 Editorial and Forum
ZUKIWORLD Discussion Forum => Suzuki 4x4 Forum => Topic started by: ebewley on March 07, 2005, 02:39:30 AM
-
Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
Reuters / March 07, 2005
DETROIT -- 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 Sunday, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said only Toyota Motor Corp.'s Corolla and the Chevrolet Cobalt from General Motors 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 mph.
Adrian Lund, the Insurance Institute's COO, said the least crashworthy of the vehicles was the aging Dodge Neon from the Chrysler group.
"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.'s Mazda 3 (without optional airbags).
-- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. 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).
++++++++++++++++++++++
link to IIHS for Forenza: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0428.htm
Link to IIHS for Aerio: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0429.htm
-
American Suzuki Motor Corporation's Response to the Recent IIHS Side-impact Test Results of the 2005 Suzuki Aerio and Forenza
Suzuki places a priority on manufacturing and selling safe vehicles. All our vehicles are designed to meet consumers' safety needs through a full complement of safety features. The Suzuki Forenza and Suzuki Aerio are safe, reliable vehicles that comply with all federal crash test standards. Like all 2005 Suzuki passenger cars, the Forenza and Aerio offer front seat-mounted side airbags for both the driver and passenger as one of multiple layers of standard safety equipment.
Both the Aerio and Forenza performed well in previous tests conducted by the IIHS. The 2002 through 2005 Aerio models earned the top overall rating from the IIHS for performance in the IIHS's 40-mph frontal offset crash test and were deemed "Best Picks." The 2004-2005 Forenza models earned an "Acceptable" rating for performance in the IIHS's 40-mph frontal offset crash test.
With respect to the recent IIHS side-impact test results, Suzuki is interested in this relatively new test and is studying the results not only for the Forenza and Aerio, but also for the other vehicles that were tested. Suzuki and other manufacturers recognize that larger, full-size SUVs and pick-up trucks may be more aggressive in accidents with passenger cars, and the IIHS test provides one method of evaluating these interactions.
Suzuki has joined other auto manufacturers in a voluntary effort to study vehicle "compatibility" issues and explore strategies that may help reduce occupant injuries. To this end, Suzuki continues to research and incorporate features aimed at enhancing vehicle compatibility into future vehicle designs.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
-
Oh big freaking surprise. You t-bone a small car with an F-350, and it HURTS...
How can a side air bag help, when a 6,000 pound vehicle smashes into the side of your econobox, and pushes the door in two feet?
The answer? STEEL. Rock sliders are my preferred side-impact protection.
-
3000lb Suzuki Swift vs 9000lb Dodge Ram
Small cars fare poorly.
HUM...
Think it took a government study to figure that one out?
~Nate
-
that is if even a swift weights 3000 lbs
-
Well, a 2500 Swift HD ;D
-
Well, a 2500 Swift HD ;D
HAHA, thats funny to think about.
A swift HD....
So, what, It's got a 2 inch suspension lift, oversized tires and a trailer hitch?
-
A swift HD....
So, what,  It's got a 2 inch suspension lift, oversized tires and a trailer hitch?
Nah - billet muffler.
-
I wonder how my '88 Samurai would do? :)
I perfer to avoid accidents.
You can visit the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (http://www.iihs.org/) and check other vehicles.
-
WOW!!!!!! A larger vehicle will cause more damage to a small one?! Where was I when this came out?!!!
Quick!!!, Tell everyone to get those tiny little F-350's and Suburbans off the road! -I don't think they would fair too well under my Freightliner.
If they drive like they have something more than bone in their skull, then I quess it won't matter too much.
Or for anyone else.
Drive smart- live longer.
-
Quick!!!, Tell everyone to get those tiny little F-350's and Suburbans off the road! -I don't think they would fair too well under my Freightliner.
HMMMMMM, I wonder how well a Freightshaker would do in an accident with a Neon.........Quick, someone get those guys on the phone and see if they can set up a test ;D
-
" NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests"
Who is paying for this kind of rediculus testing?! :o Whats next...
"NEWS: Tall vehicles roll easier than short ones" AND
"NEWS: Small motors get better milage than big motors."
:PMike
-
LOL...
-
One additional point is that most vehicles are designed to crumple in the front as well; ergo, if you hit an econo-box with what looked like a cement slab backed by rigid steel beams, it's going to cause more damage than if you hit the same vehicle broadside with another vehicle. Let's see here, this test was conducted by the *Insurance* Institute for Highway Safety; ever wonder if they don't engineer these tests to produce certain results in order to justify ever-higher insurance premiums? However, I will do my part and absolutely be alert for rampaging bridge abutments that might try to do harm on my 2200 lb econo-SUV. The really sad thing is that these clowns probably make exponentially greater salaries than I do, and my insurance premiums are funding it. :o OK, I'm off the soapbox; we now return you to your previous rant... ;D
-
do you think an exo cage would provide much protection to a samurai for collisions on the road? I need to prove to my parents that 86 samurais are safe :-/
-
I saw this story on the news |removethispart|@ noon today too. It was rediculous. They had opened the story with "A new study shows that smaller vehicles are |removethispart|@ risk from accidents w/ larger vehicles like SUVs." When did common sense ideas become news? :P
-
This is part of the reason why my wife and I decided to get rid of her Escort with our third child on the way and get an XL-7. She's getting used to it now and even admits that its nice to be the same height as everybody else. At least there's a fighting chance if your in a reck.
-
do you think an exo cage would provide much protection to a samurai for collisions on the road? I need to prove to my parents that 86 samurais are safe  :-/
Vehicles aren't safe, DRIVERS are safe - or not.
Let's face it - anything you can hurl down the road at 80 MPH into a bridge abutment is only as safe as the operator makes it.
-
When did common sense ideas become news?  :P
When it stopped being common...
::)
-
i know its only as safe as the driver is but sometimes you cant control how other idiots drive. and lets face it, a samurai is like a little tin box. but do you think an exo cage would help at all in perhaps a T bone crash.
-
aginst another samuri mabie but aginst a jacked f-350 you couldnt build a x-0 cage that is strong enough. as long as there is big cars and little cars this problem goes on. does that mean that i am going to drive the same thing as everyone else just so its FAIR, HELL NO. the answer is___ people are meant to die ,when your time comes it doesent matter weather you are confronted by a f-350 or old age. if you are scared of death then you better wrap yourself with pillows and stay the hell home, and even then good luck!
fate is___fate
jason
-
the answer is___ people are meant to die ,when your time comes it doesent matter weather you are confronted by a f-350 or old age. if you are scared of death then you better wrap yourself with pillows and stay the hell home, and even then good luck!
fate is___fate
jason
Jeeze... No more of that sunshine, puppy-dogs, and lolly-pops kind of talk... Please.... :)
-Eric
-
With this logic, everyone should run out and buy something bigger. This would make our roads safer, right?
The problem with this type of logic is that they overlook the fact that "small" is relative.
For example, if everyone drove go carts, a samurai would be the biggest, therefore the "safest" thing on the road.
As giant SUVs become the norm in this country, all vehicles become relatively smaller. Cars that were "normal sized" 20 years ago have become tiny compared to a Ford Excursion or a H2.
-
What about small versus large. About 10 years ago we had Toyota Corrolla broadside a Pierce firetruck at 45 mph. Obviously, the Corrolla lost but, it did total the firetruck by rolling it onto its side. The four fireman weren't real thrilled either.