New IIHS side-impact test flunks virtually every mainstream midsize sedan, wagon. - Auto blog

[wemay]

Only the Outback scored a "good" rating.
This version of the side-impact test isn't official yet.

New IIHS side-impact test flunks virtually every mainstream midsize sedan

The insurance group's new testing methodology is bad news for current safety engineering in midsize cars.

www.autoblog.com

 

[Jetronic]

Car makers have always designed their cars to beat the tests. If you give a student a list of questions he will be asked (no more, no less) those answers will be all he studies aswell.

But seems to me the issue is with the size and weight of pickups and SUV... the impact vehicle hits above the sill and floor, so the B-pillar takes all of the energy.

If a sedan, say a tesla model S with a low nose, hits a truck on the side, does that increase the roll-over chance for the truck?

 

[slo town]

The primary purpose of crash tests is to compare vehicles in the same weight and class. Everyone knows a small vehicle loses against a large vehicle, or at least they should.

So what is the purpose of comparing side impacts of midsized sedans with full-sized trucks? If they're going to do that, why stop there? They should compare side impacts of full-sized trucks with industrial-sized, fully laden dump trucks. You'd see the same result.

I've become so suspicious of modern day motives I wonder if this is a covert attempt by automakers via the IIHS to sway people into buying $75,000 F-150s instead of more affordable sedans, which have much lower margins.

With respect to the IIHS small versus big methodology, I find this statement alarming. "The new test results won't count against existing IIHS ratings or awards, but they will be published alongside the current ones through 2022. After that, IIHS will use the new side-impact test by default."

What this tells me is that across the board all smaller/lighter/lower vehicles will be deemed unsafe in the future. At a minimum this undermines the credibility of the IIHS, for me at least.

Scott

PS There was a recent thread about this same topic. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...les-to-most-midsize-cars.358001/#post-6193446

 

[riverblue]

The primary purpose of crash tests is to compare vehicles in the same weight and class. Everyone knows a small vehicle loses against a large vehicle, or at least they should.

So what is the purpose of comparing side impacts of midsized sedans with full-sized trucks? If they're going to do that, why stop there? They should compare side impacts of full-sized trucks with industrial-sized, fully laden dump trucks. You'd see the same result.

I've become so suspicious of modern day motives I wonder if this is a covert attempt by automakers via the IIHS to sway people into buying $75,000 F-150s instead of more affordable sedans, which have much lower margins.

With respect to the IIHS small versus big methodology, I find this statement alarming. "The new test results won't count against existing IIHS ratings or awards, but they will be published alongside the current ones through 2022. After that, IIHS will use the new side-impact test by default."

What this tells me is that across the board all smaller/lighter/lower vehicles will be deemed unsafe in the future. At a minimum this undermines the credibility of the IIHS, for me at least.

Scott

PS There was a recent thread about this same topic. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...les-to-most-midsize-cars.358001/#post-6193446

I've the same suspicion; if the profit motive is #1, kickbacks just make sense (regardless of legality, since the laws regarding collusion are rarely enforced these days). The IIHS may also be a forthcoming example of the self-licking ice cream cone, a phenomenon in which an organization justifies its own existence by proposing solutions to problems that don't exist. Eliminating risk in driving means not driving at all.

 

[PandaBear]

The primary purpose of crash tests is to compare vehicles in the same weight and class. Everyone knows a small vehicle loses against a large vehicle, or at least they should.

So what is the purpose of comparing side impacts of midsized sedans with full-sized trucks? If they're going to do that, why stop there? They should compare side impacts of full-sized trucks with industrial-sized, fully laden dump trucks. You'd see the same result.

I've become so suspicious of modern day motives I wonder if this is a covert attempt by automakers via the IIHS to sway people into buying $75,000 F-150s instead of more affordable sedans, which have much lower margins.

With respect to the IIHS small versus big methodology, I find this statement alarming. "The new test results won't count against existing IIHS ratings or awards, but they will be published alongside the current ones through 2022. After that, IIHS will use the new side-impact test by default."

What this tells me is that across the board all smaller/lighter/lower vehicles will be deemed unsafe in the future. At a minimum this undermines the credibility of the IIHS, for me at least.

Scott

PS There was a recent thread about this same topic. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...les-to-most-midsize-cars.358001/#post-6193446

A little of both would be my guess.

On one hand you want to tell people to buy your more profitable products so you tell your potential customers what they want to hear. On the other hand, because there are so many people buying them you are in an arms race with the rest of the world.

The problem is, that most people aren't as skilled in handling a bigger vehicle as a smaller vehicle. Smaller vehicles are easier to drive and end up in fewer accidents.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

The primary purpose of crash tests is to compare vehicles in the same weight and class. Everyone knows a small vehicle loses against a large vehicle, or at least they should.

So what is the purpose of comparing side impacts of midsized sedans with full-sized trucks? If they're going to do that, why stop there? They should compare side impacts of full-sized trucks with industrial-sized, fully laden dump trucks. You'd see the same result.

I've become so suspicious of modern day motives I wonder if this is a covert attempt by automakers via the IIHS to sway people into buying $75,000 F-150s instead of more affordable sedans, which have much lower margins.

With respect to the IIHS small versus big methodology, I find this statement alarming. "The new test results won't count against existing IIHS ratings or awards, but they will be published alongside the current ones through 2022. After that, IIHS will use the new side-impact test by default."

What this tells me is that across the board all smaller/lighter/lower vehicles will be deemed unsafe in the future. At a minimum this undermines the credibility of the IIHS, for me at least.

Scott

PS There was a recent thread about this same topic. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...les-to-most-midsize-cars.358001/#post-6193446

I've the same suspicion; if the profit motive is #1, kickbacks just make sense (regardless of legality, since the laws regarding collusion are rarely enforced these days). The IIHS may also be a forthcoming example of the self-licking ice cream cone, a phenomenon in which an organization justifies its own existence by proposing solutions to problems that don't exist. Eliminating risk in driving means not driving at all.

Right but they should still test vs other predominate types of vehicles on the road. The SUV being very common (45 percent of annual sales). Sedans only make up approx 25 percent of total sales in the US.