tagheuer commented:
August 14, 2012, 2:26 pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by beden1
It is a disappointment that BMW is not a leader in safety as they had been considered back in the 1970's and 1980's. Safety should be a top priority for a premier European brand trying to justify high sticker prices. I think BMW and other car manufacturers have decided that their prime focus should be on adding invasive and needless technologies, and gas savings to boost sales as opposed to safety as their prime objective.
I think we will see more structural weaknesses as car companies use more weight savings components for better MPG. And, if the European car companies keep going down these paths, what is going to separate them from the Toyotas of the world who offer features without solid foundations?
|
Really?
Toyota currently has 11 models, from small to large, which are IIHS top safety picks.
Toyota also has, and has had for many many years, one of the highest predictable reliability scores of any automaker, by just about any measure (JD Power, Consumer Reports, TrueDelta, take your pick)
How can you say Toyota vehicles don't have solid foundations?
They are as safe, if not safer, than BMWs and are much more reliable.
Its not like BMW is anything special when it comes to safety.
Of course you can't compare driving dynamics/pleasure between Toyota and BMW, but please don't imply that Toyota makes crappy cars with lousy foundations, because that's simply not true.
August 14, 2012, 10:50 am
I guess if you are about to hit something make sure you hit it square on....
August 14, 2012, 10:52 am
yea, most cars that hit at that angle are ****ed
August 14, 2012, 11:15 am
The low scores are due to a brand new test they added. Prior to this year, they tested full front and off set crashes, as well as side impact, rear impact, etc etc. This year, they added an extreme off set crash test where only a small amount of the car, less than 20% actually hits something. This is very common with telephone polls and trees. Nothing like having the contents of the wheel well pushed into your legs.
It is a bit disappointing, but certainly highlights some of the value brought on by these organizations. I suspect despite the results, in 5 year to 7 years, all cars will start scoring well in the test. Guess I will avoid telephone polls until then, or as others have said, hit it dead on!
I did laugh at Mercedes response to the test. They basically said "We call BS" our cars are safe.
August 14, 2012, 1:43 pm
I hit a traffic light straight on about 20 years ago, pretty low speed, about 20 mph. The car was < a year old, and it was written off. You don't want to hit narrow immovable objects.
August 14, 2012, 1:54 pm
It is a disappointment that BMW is not a leader in safety as they had been considered back in the 1970's and 1980's. Safety should be a top priority for a premier European brand trying to justify high sticker prices. I think BMW and other car manufacturers have decided that their prime focus should be on adding invasive and needless technologies, and gas savings to boost sales as opposed to safety as their prime objective.
I think we will see more structural weaknesses as car companies use more weight savings components for better MPG. And, if the European car companies keep going down these paths, what is going to separate them from the Toyotas of the world who offer features without solid foundations?
August 14, 2012, 2:03 pm
That's what ASS is for. When PDC senses you're close to an offset crash it just stops the engine, problem solved. You can even program your 1-8 shortcut keys to simulate it.
BJ
August 14, 2012, 2:26 pm
I think we will see more structural weaknesses as car companies use more weight savings components for better MPG. And, if the European car companies keep going down these paths, what is going to separate them from the Toyotas of the world who offer features without solid foundations?
Toyota currently has 11 models, from small to large, which are IIHS top safety picks.
Toyota also has, and has had for many many years, one of the highest predictable reliability scores of any automaker, by just about any measure (JD Power, Consumer Reports, TrueDelta, take your pick)
How can you say Toyota vehicles don't have solid foundations?
They are as safe, if not safer, than BMWs and are much more reliable.
Its not like BMW is anything special when it comes to safety.
Of course you can't compare driving dynamics/pleasure between Toyota and BMW, but please don't imply that Toyota makes crappy cars with lousy foundations, because that's simply not true.
August 14, 2012, 3:16 pm
BJ
August 14, 2012, 3:25 pm
I think we will see more structural weaknesses as car companies use more weight savings components for better MPG. And, if the European car companies keep going down these paths, what is going to separate them from the Toyotas of the world who offer features without solid foundations?
This new test and this report is nothing more than a red herring. It is not possible to construct a car that is totally indestructible.
August 14, 2012, 3:25 pm
didnt even know i have knee airbags
August 14, 2012, 3:34 pm
August 14, 2012, 3:44 pm
Of course you can't compare driving dynamics/pleasure between Toyota and BMW, but please don't imply that Toyota makes crappy cars with lousy foundations, because that's simply not true.
See the 335i top speed crash vs. a tree where the driver had a broken nose (and killed his two friends
Volvo is tops but they've got nothing else to do since their engines, and electronics suck
Wasn't shocked to see Acura, but they're always quite about their accomplishments.
August 14, 2012, 4:32 pm
August 14, 2012, 4:52 pm
Toyota currently has 11 models, from small to large, which are IIHS top safety picks.
They are as safe, if not safer, than BMWs and are much more reliable.
Its not like BMW is anything special when it comes to safety.
OH and if you visit www.safercar.gov and look at the manufacturers' test scores, you find some interesting statistics. Referring to 2012 models, ALL BMW models tested are given 5 star overall ratings. However, referring back to those Toyotas tested 33 models earn 4 stars, 9 models earn 5 stars and 1 model earned 3 stars.
I respectfully disagree with your assertion.
August 14, 2012, 8:37 pm
Volvo is tops but they've got nothing else to do since their engines, and electronics suck
.
August 14, 2012, 8:41 pm
This new test and this report is nothing more than a red herring. It is not possible to construct a car that is totally indestructible.
August 14, 2012, 9:20 pm
I'll stick with the n54 for now, if I need to win more I'll buy an m5 or better
I did get spanked by an IS-f and it was pretty cool to see.
August 14, 2012, 9:29 pm
If there's a car out there that is pseudo-3 Series competition, you're it's champion. Why?
BJ
August 14, 2012, 9:47 pm
If there's a car out there that is pseudo-3 Series competition, you're it's champion. Why?
August 14, 2012, 10:54 pm
I'll stick with the n54 for now, if I need to win more I'll buy an m5 or better
I did get spanked by an IS-f and it was pretty cool to see.
August 14, 2012, 11:00 pm
If there's a car out there that is pseudo-3 Series competition, you're it's champion. Why?
BJ
Maybe why they did well in this new test, Volvo probably thought with the R design specs, the driver tends to have too much fun, more likely to crash into a power pole or a tree.
The way BJ drives, you are constantly watching all the camera images so no leaves get blown against the bumper. Crash into a tree?
August 14, 2012, 11:36 pm
If there's a car out there that is pseudo-3 Series competition, you're it's champion. Why?
BJ
August 15, 2012, 1:40 am
August 15, 2012, 7:42 am
August 17, 2012, 12:55 pm
Did anyone watch the video of the 3 series testing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcSDBrlHbCo
August 17, 2012, 3:58 pm
Ouch. That hurts to watch. The wheel and curtain airbags did a great job keeping the upper torso and head in place despite the twisting rebound of the car. I've seen video of other vehicles where the driver slides to the left and the head goes between the wheel and curtain airbag.
August 17, 2012, 4:42 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcSDBrlHbCo
August 18, 2012, 6:32 am
August 18, 2012, 7:06 am
Did you guys see the one with the Lexus. OMG, terrible. at least the F30 dummy hits the airbag in the center, knee airbag does its job, I would say hurt a little but nothing serious.
August 18, 2012, 7:06 am
IIHS insurance losses by make, model:
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/co...008-2010&cls=3
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/co...sz=4&sort=name
August 18, 2012, 9:38 am
I think it's great as consumers that we now have access to this information when car shopping.
August 18, 2012, 10:32 am
Toyota currently has 11 models, from small to large, which are IIHS top safety picks.
Toyota also has, and has had for many many years, one of the highest predictable reliability scores of any automaker, by just about any measure (JD Power, Consumer Reports, TrueDelta, take your pick)
How can you say Toyota vehicles don't have solid foundations?
They are as safe, if not safer, than BMWs and are much more reliable.
Its not like BMW is anything special when it comes to safety.
Of course you can't compare driving dynamics/pleasure between Toyota and BMW, but please don't imply that Toyota makes crappy cars with lousy foundations, because that's simply not true.
August 18, 2012, 11:06 am
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/co...008-2010&cls=3
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/co...sz=4&sort=name
Not sure what insurance statistics about totaled cars has to do with anything lol Geo could come back, build a car, get better numbers than any car in the history of manufacturing, and it still wouldn't change the fact that the engine/interior could suck
August 18, 2012, 6:10 pm
I'm sure that BMW engineers its cars to do well in crash tests. Now the IIHS has introduced a new test. The Volvo S60 does well but the BMW F30 is marginal. The Mercedes C-class is poor. The VW CC did so poorly that the driver's door flew off which means you can fall out and get killed. The Audi A4's door opened but it did not fall off.
I'm sure BMW will see if it can do better. It is not easy because if it does well on the pole test, it may be too rigid and not absorb energy in the full frontal test.
http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr081412.html
August 18, 2012, 7:28 pm
Welcome to last week....
August 18, 2012, 11:41 pm
I looked and didn't see it. Now I see, thanks to the above link. It seems, that there were a bunch of comments then it stopped several days ago. Ooopsss..
August 19, 2012, 4:51 am
I took a closer look at this in the hope of finding something. I did. Check out the videos of the two cars that did well and compare them to the videos of say the 3 and A4. Look at the Acura TL video. The car basically gets the side shaven off and continues on forward. With the 3, it basically comes to a complete stop then bounces off a little to end up sideways. In other words, the 3 takes a very nasty hit compared to the much softer blow of the TL. But why? One could argue that the TL is better designed. Or that the hit didn't catch its cabin cage while it did for the 3. In other words, if the hit was another inch or two more outside, the 3 might have fared the same way as the TL, or if the hit was another inch or two more inside, the TL might have been demolished in the same way as the 3. This is speculation, but the video is very clear that the impacts were not of the same nature, whereas there is no such difference for full frontal or even moderate offset crashes. That, along with the fact the they seem to imply different key observations for the two A4 crashes, leads me to believe that we are too close to a structural threshold with the 25% offset to make comparisons meaningful (i.e. offsets of say 22% or 27% could produce very different results). I would make much, if anything, from this particular test.
August 20, 2012, 10:53 am
^^
it's cause the Acura's frame rails are pushed out more to the side. If you look at the second pic you'll see the main part of the 3-series structure didn't engage if it had more of the impact energy would have been absorbed as was the case in the TL
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.a...5&seriesid=458
August 20, 2012, 11:05 am
http://corporate.honda.com/safety/de...x?id=collision
http://world.honda.com/automobile-te...compatibility/
Honda deliberately set the structure more outwards, specifically to accommodate this sort of extreme offset collision.
Secondly Honda channels the force upwards into the A-pillar, rather than perpendicular to it which crushes it.
The drawbacks to this strategy are large bulging fenders compared to low profile fenders found on more aesthetically pleasing cars. Which is why the only cars with structures which held up well were the G37, TL and S60 all of which have meaty fenders. I expect most Honda products to be rated either Good or Acceptable in this test.
August 20, 2012, 11:09 am
OH and if you visit www.safercar.gov and look at the manufacturers' test scores, you find some interesting statistics. Referring to 2012 models, ALL BMW models tested are given 5 star overall ratings. However, referring back to those Toyotas tested 33 models earn 4 stars, 9 models earn 5 stars and 1 model earned 3 stars.
I respectfully disagree with your assertion.
August 20, 2012, 11:36 am
I'll stick with the n54 for now, if I need to win more I'll buy an m5 or better
I did get spanked by an IS-f and it was pretty cool to see.
You, on the other hand, well . . . maybe you're 17 and dream a lot.