SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test

Discussions about other vehicles other than the Vibe & Matrix.
Post Reply
Sputnik
Posts: 3775
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 9:56 am
Location: Ottawa, ON

SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test

Post by Sputnik »

Here's a list of vehicles tested by the Insurance Institute... The format is a bit funky, but its Name of Vehicle (model year), Rating, Side Air BagsSubaru Forester (2003) Good Standard Ford Escape (2001-03) Good Optional Hyundai Santa Fe (2002-03) Acceptable Standard Honda CR-V (2002-03) Marginal Optional Jeep Wrangler (1997-2003) Marginal Not offered Ford Escape (w/o air bag) Poor Optional Honda Element (2003) Poor Optional Saturn Vue (2002-03) Poor Optional Land Rover Freelander (2002-03) Poor Not offered Suzuki Grand Vitara (1999-2003) Poor Not offered Toyota RAV4 (2001-03) Poor Not offered Mitsubishi Outlander (2003) Poor Optional Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Notice the Honda Element did poorly. You can view the entire article at USA today: http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/200 ... ests_x.htm
GenVibe Global Moderator

Current: 2012 Nissan Juke SL - Sapphire Blue Onyx (July '12 - present)
Current: 2012 Nissan Leaf SL 100% Electric - Blue Ocean (Dec '11 - present)

Past: 2003 Pontiac Vibe - Satellite Silver (Aug '02 - Dec '07)
NovaResource
Posts: 2062
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 12:22 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (Sputnik)

Post by NovaResource »

A couple of things to note here:1. this was a side impact test.2. this was a new test using a larger and heavier vehicle to simulate being hit by an SUV3. all cars tested passed government standards for side impacts using the standard vehicle.
Sputnik
Posts: 3775
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 9:56 am
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (NovaResource)

Post by Sputnik »

quote:A couple of things to note here:1. this was a side impact test.2. this was a new test using a larger and heavier vehicle to simulate being hit by an SUV3. all cars tested passed government standards for side impacts using the standard vehicle.Yes I should have put Side Impact crash in my title, but did mention side air bags. The crash was to simulate being hit by an SUV or pick up truck at 30 mph.
GenVibe Global Moderator

Current: 2012 Nissan Juke SL - Sapphire Blue Onyx (July '12 - present)
Current: 2012 Nissan Leaf SL 100% Electric - Blue Ocean (Dec '11 - present)

Past: 2003 Pontiac Vibe - Satellite Silver (Aug '02 - Dec '07)
Sputnik
Posts: 3775
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 9:56 am
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (Sputnik)

Post by Sputnik »

And now I've edited the title.
GenVibe Global Moderator

Current: 2012 Nissan Juke SL - Sapphire Blue Onyx (July '12 - present)
Current: 2012 Nissan Leaf SL 100% Electric - Blue Ocean (Dec '11 - present)

Past: 2003 Pontiac Vibe - Satellite Silver (Aug '02 - Dec '07)
mu_ohio
Posts: 415
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 6:51 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (NovaResource)

Post by mu_ohio »

quote:A couple of things to note here:1. this was a side impact test.2. this was a new test using a larger and heavier vehicle to simulate being hit by an SUV3. all cars tested passed government standards for side impacts using the standard vehicle.I think it's about time that we see test results using a heavier vehicle. The government tests are questionable IMO. It seems that the Insurance Industry is trying to provide more real world results, plus they have a heavy interest in safety. The safer the cars, the less money they have to pay and the more they keep. I've always took the goverment standards as an early sign of safety and then wait for these tests to back them up.
2004 Pontiac GTOPhantom Black w/black leather
User avatar
ColonelPanic
Posts: 8434
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 8:48 am
Location: South Central Indiana

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (Sputnik)

Post by ColonelPanic »

quote:Notice the Honda Element did poorly.I can certainly see how it would, considering how they've got that suicide-door thing going on. There isn't much support there on the side...Glad to see them using a larger vehicle for testing purposes... More of a real-world type scenerio...
ragingfish
Posts: 11022
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 8:23 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (silverawd26)

Post by ragingfish »

FMU, Hyundais did relatively well in the safety arena...same with Kia (seeing as they're the same parent company...
YES!I still visit GenVibe periodically. I have not forgotten about my "original" family over here!

2009 PONTIAC G8
3.6L V6 (256 HP @ 6300 rpm, 248 ft-lbs. @ 2100 rpm)
ragingfish
Posts: 11022
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 8:23 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (silverawd26)

Post by ragingfish »

I heard the safety on the VUE was only so-so...Which goes against everything Saturn was originally founded on -- safe, affordable cars.I remember seeing the commercials that went something to the effect of "the police said the car saved my life. I will never buy another brand ever again. A Saturn saved my life..."
YES!I still visit GenVibe periodically. I have not forgotten about my "original" family over here!

2009 PONTIAC G8
3.6L V6 (256 HP @ 6300 rpm, 248 ft-lbs. @ 2100 rpm)
mu_ohio
Posts: 415
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 6:51 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (ragingfish)

Post by mu_ohio »

quote:I heard the safety on the VUE was only so-so...Which goes against everything Saturn was originally founded on -- safe, affordable cars.I remember seeing the commercials that went something to the effect of "the police said the car saved my life. I will never buy another brand ever again. A Saturn saved my life..."That is sad IMO. I know that when my brother t-boned a car that pulled out in front of him when he was going 45, his Saturn SC2 held up like a champ. The car was totaled, but my brother was able to walk away and he even went to work after the accident was cleaned up. There safety really impressed me when that happened, but this isn't a good sign.
2004 Pontiac GTOPhantom Black w/black leather
NovaResource
Posts: 2062
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 12:22 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (mu_ohio)

Post by NovaResource »

quote:I think it's about time that we see test results using a heavier vehicle. The government tests are questionable IMO. It seems that the Insurance Industry is trying to provide more real world results, plus they have a heavy interest in safety. The safer the cars, the less money they have to pay and the more they keep. I've always took the goverment standards as an early sign of safety and then wait for these tests to back them up.I couldn't agree more. There are more and more 'big" vehicles on the roads today and the tests and safety standard should take them more into consideration.
ragingfish
Posts: 11022
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 8:23 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (mu_ohio)

Post by ragingfish »

Well, this is only a side impact test. It may fare better in a front end collision...
YES!I still visit GenVibe periodically. I have not forgotten about my "original" family over here!

2009 PONTIAC G8
3.6L V6 (256 HP @ 6300 rpm, 248 ft-lbs. @ 2100 rpm)
Shadow Realm
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:19 am

Re: SUVs without side air bags do poorly in crash test (ragingfish)

Post by Shadow Realm »

Between the Vue, Sante Fe, and the Sorrento I'd pick the Sorrento as long as I planned on keeping it till I paid it off. I didn't like the Vue...seemed too plasticky looking. I looked at it when I was thinking of buying the Vibe.Shadow Realm
Abyss Monotone GT, 6 speed, Moon & Tunes, Power Group,and 16" Alloys. Soon you can see my Vibe GT at Shadowrealm's car pics but for now it is under construction!
Post Reply