• The development of any software program, including, but not limited to, training a machine learning or artificial intelligence (AI) system, is prohibited using the contents and materials on this website.

Crash tests with pictures, many cars ..

haz

I AM OT!
Joined
May 28, 2004
Messages
5,517
Location
Oslo
Car(s)
Tesla Model S 75D BMW E39 Wagon
Renault Clio - #2 in its class




Suzuki Forfour (could it be that this is really called Forfour??? It said so but...what about the Smart Forfour?) - got only two stars for children seat safety




Smart Forfour - worst in its class




VW Passat - 5 stars for adults, but bad for pedestrians




BMW 3 Series - best in its class




Dacia Logan - worst in its class




Fiat Stilo - 4 stars for adults and children




Honda FR-V - worst in its class




Lexus GS 300 - best and only in its class, 5 stars for driver safety




Merc A Class - best in its class, good protection for kids




Peugot 1007 - best in its class and best in the whole test




haz
 
i'm surprised about the HR-V, was expecting it to do much better

and look at that beemer, you'll die after the crash caus you can't find the door to get out :?
 
bone said:
i'm surprised about the HR-V, was expecting it to do much better

and look at that beemer, you'll die after the crash caus you can't find the door to get out :?

The HR-V surprises me as well ... how difficult is it make that type of car safe to crash??

What do you mean with no door to get out?

haz
 
haz said:
bone said:
i'm surprised about the HR-V, was expecting it to do much better

and look at that beemer, you'll die after the crash caus you can't find the door to get out :?

The HR-V surprises me as well ... how difficult is it make that type of car safe to crash??

What do you mean with no door to get out?

haz

Can't find the door, because of all those airbags. I think that's what he was trying to say.

The 1007 may be the safest, but how do you open that door if the electric mechanism fails?

Oh, and the Suzuki ForFour might be a typo. That's a Swift.
 
I hate this pedestrian safety thing! When/if you're being hit by a 407, you don't rise up afterwards and say, "Whoa! What nice car to get hit by, nicely round and smoooth.. Can i try again?".
 
bitrix said:
I hate this pedestrian safety thing! When/if you're being hit by a 407, you don't rise up afterwards and say, "Whoa! What nice car to get hit by, nicely round and smoooth.. Can i try again?".

I understand you, as I hate the shape that new cars are forced to take because of pedestrian safety, and the emphasys they're putting on it, but you may say "Ouch!" instead of not saying anything at all.
 
? don't think it makes that much of a difference. if the pedestrian would be dead with an ordinary car, he would be dead if hit by a "pedestrian-safe" car as well.

the only difference will be on slower hittings, where he might break sth, he will have nothing, just as the car, where you needed to get new bumper before, it now pops back in place
 
bone said:
? don't think it makes that much of a difference. if the pedestrian would be dead with an ordinary car, he would be dead if hit by a "pedestrian-safe" car as well.

the only difference will be on slower hittings, where he might break sth, he will have nothing, just as the car, where you needed to get new bumper before, it now pops back in place

In fact, you can be dead because your head hits something hard that wouldn't hit on a pedestrian safe car. That's why engines must now be 10cm away from the hood.
 
Euro Ncap test, are just such a hoax.
Car manufacturers are building cars on those regulations.
I dont want to say its not good, but those test are allways the same.
When are accidents allways the same ??????????

I would like to see that 1007 chrash on the back of a truck/ lorry. And not on a concrete block. :thumbsdown:
 
Duell said:
Euro Ncap test, are just such a hoax.
Car manufacturers are building cars on those regulations.
I dont want to say its not good, but those test are allways the same.
When are accidents allways the same ??????????

I would like to see that 1007 chrash on the back of a truck/ lorry. And not on a concrete block. :thumbsdown:

The Euro NCAP test, isn't only one crash into a block and then done. There's alot of different tests and measures. They test the most common kinds of crashing. So if car makers make their cars so they will do good in the NCAP tests, then they'd also do good in real life.
 
bitrix said:
The Euro NCAP test, isn't only one crash into a block and then done. There's alot of different tests and measures. They test the most common kinds of crashing. So if car makers make their cars so they will do good in the NCAP tests, then they'd also do good in real life.

I know its not just one test, There are Front, Side, Pole and pedestrian crashes.
But I just think that they should do more different tests. It is just to narrow.

Why not test different type's of cars against each other. And then the compatibility problem when small car and a SUV crash. The Volvo xc90 has a lower impact point, to solve this problem. But that will never been shown in a crash test. Because it has nothing to do with the safety of the passengers of the xc90.

Euroncap has to expand there test more to get a better sight of car safety.
 
What happened with the 3 series wheels...? just totally gone?
 
Dark_Templer_102 said:
What happened with the 3 series wheels...? just totally gone?

That is a deformable barrier, and the wheel of a BMW is always on the edge, so it's outside our sight, but I guess that it's still there.
 
The main probem is, companies like Renault are engineering their cars to do well in the NCAP tests. The reason for this is that it helps sales as people are impressed by the safety. The only thing is, it's very easy to engineer a car to crash well in 5 or 6 very defined situations. How well it performs when it crashes into a concrete bollard at 63.56deg at 50mph is a different matter. Furthermore, Renault in particular are employing sly tactics. The basic Renault Modus doesn't have side air bags. The car Euro NCAP tested did, and yet in Renault adverts they still state that the whole range has 5*. This is not the case as the rating was awarded to a car with side airbags.

TBH, if you want a safe car, consider the people that have always made safe cars. Volvo spend millions each year on crash testing and have their own billion pound test centre with a launch ramp that can have it's angle adjusted to anything between 90 and 0 deg. They also investigate every real crash involving one of their cars within a 50mile radius (this includes old cars).

Also...hardly anyone thinks about active saftey. A Lotus Elise is much more likely to avoid an accident in the 1st place than a Range Rover as it's more maneuverable, and will brake to 0 in a shorter distance.
 
Top