Hello Guest

NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests

  • 23 Replies
  • 4180 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline ebewley

  • 6566
  • 66
  • Gender: Male
  • ZUKIWORLD Online, Editor
    • ZUKIWORLD online
NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« 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
« Last Edit: March 07, 2005, 02:45:09 AM by ebewley »
Eric L. Bewley                               
Editor, ZUKIWORLD Online                   

Suzuki 4x4 Owners Association - Please Join  The ZUKIWORLD ORDER Today!
About ZUKIWORLD Online: We are an enthusiast web site dedicated to the promotion of the Suzuki Automobile as the best and most capable vehicle on the planet. We offer product reviews, Tech tips, DIY, Travel and Adventure, Forum, Technical information, Life Style, and so much more!

*

Offline ebewley

  • 6566
  • 66
  • Gender: Male
  • ZUKIWORLD Online, Editor
    • ZUKIWORLD online
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #1 on: March 07, 2005, 02:41:05 AM »
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.



+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Eric L. Bewley                               
Editor, ZUKIWORLD Online                   

Suzuki 4x4 Owners Association - Please Join  The ZUKIWORLD ORDER Today!
About ZUKIWORLD Online: We are an enthusiast web site dedicated to the promotion of the Suzuki Automobile as the best and most capable vehicle on the planet. We offer product reviews, Tech tips, DIY, Travel and Adventure, Forum, Technical information, Life Style, and so much more!

*

Offline Bobzooki

  • 1754
  • 2
  • Gender: Male
  • Web Wheeler
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #2 on: March 07, 2005, 02:58:02 AM »
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.
Bob

Tahoe 24' Fish-N-Fun Tritoon
115 HP Mercury outboard

*

Offline Natebert

  • 1098
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #3 on: March 07, 2005, 02:59:24 AM »
3000lb Suzuki Swift vs 9000lb Dodge Ram

Small cars fare poorly.

HUM...

Think it took a government study to figure that one out?

~Nate


*

Offline r3cc0s

  • 321
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #4 on: March 07, 2005, 03:11:39 AM »
that is if even a swift weights 3000 lbs
03' 2.0L CAMI Tracker w/ 1.5" Front Spacers, 2" Rear Spacers, 1 & 1/4" poly-rubber rear spacer w/ hose clamps, Monroe Crown Vic interceptor rear shocks,1/4" bumpstop extenders, 1.5" strut Extenders, removal of sway bar and strut bar + plenty of cutting for 245/75/16 Goodyear MTRs

*

Offline LawDog

  • 531
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • Lakeview Motor Sports' Makin it Hert! Tell u whut!
    • Emerling Chevrolet
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #5 on: March 07, 2005, 03:17:24 AM »
Well, a 2500 Swift HD ;D
"I'm the Law 'round here" said the Duckshirt.

Get a Zuk, Get it dirty, Git-R-Done!!

At Lakeview Motor Sports we specialize in rediculousness, hackdome, and wasting your time.

*

Offline Natebert

  • 1098
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #6 on: March 07, 2005, 03:24:19 AM »
Quote
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?


*

Offline Bobzooki

  • 1754
  • 2
  • Gender: Male
  • Web Wheeler
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #7 on: March 07, 2005, 03:32:23 AM »
Quote
A swift HD....

So, what,  It's got a 2 inch suspension lift, oversized tires and a trailer hitch?


Nah - billet muffler.
Bob

Tahoe 24' Fish-N-Fun Tritoon
115 HP Mercury outboard

*

Offline Road_Dog

  • 19
  • 0
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #8 on: March 07, 2005, 04:33:46 AM »
I wonder how my '88 Samurai would do? :)

I perfer to avoid accidents.

You can visit the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and check other vehicles.

*

Offline puddlejumper

  • 40
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • Hummer escape pod.
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #9 on: March 07, 2005, 06:39:19 AM »
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.
My other car is a Freightliner.

*

Offline trackinstile

  • 435
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • Too young to quit........Too old to change........
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2005, 08:32:46 AM »
Quote


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
A wise man once said, "Wherever you go...........There you are.............." 2000 Tracker 4 door with the 2.0 liter "Big Block". 5 speed 4WD  2001 XL-7 EX II

*

Offline Mikerpm4x4

  • 2875
  • 12
  • Gender: Male
  • Redline... all the time!
    • www.rpm4x4.com
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2005, 10:16:03 AM »
" 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


If your not living life to the fullest then your not living at all.

You wont really know if your wrong till your upsidedown

*

Offline Maiden Hell

  • 1650
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • MAIDEN HELL!
    • My Space
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #12 on: March 07, 2005, 10:54:43 AM »
LOL...

*

shilly

Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #13 on: March 07, 2005, 12:30:04 PM »
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

*

Offline thermal

  • 15
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEWS: Small cars fare poorly in crash tests
« Reply #14 on: March 07, 2005, 02:29:32 PM »
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  :-/