[n5160u]

Originally Posted by joshuajeeper

However, if you notice. They don't test things like double impact crumple zones (able to hand more that one inpact - a.k.a. pileup), pre-safe systems (BAS, ADS, SBC/ABR ect.), ETR (seat belt retractors), high impact offset crash, ability to exit vehicle quickly and safely, roll overs, ability to not also anielate the opposing vehicle, and many many others. They look at two main things - frontal (off-set) and side impacts at 40MPH. There is a company in Britain that does REALISTIC testing. They took a 2007 Subaru Forester and did a typical 55MPH rear end collision and then another vehicle rear ended it at the same speed. Bad things happened. And that is a very realistic accident. Crash test ratings are not all they are cracked up to be!

The IIHS crash tests are as close to real crashes as any test that must use repeatable and standardized test procedures can get. The test does not address the additional safety features built into some cars unless those additional features affect the results of the frontal offset and side impact tests. Although every car builder that tests poorly in these tests are quick to point out that their cars meet the more relaxed Federal NCAP tests and claim the IIHS test have no relation to the real world, you need to remember a few points. The Federal NCAP tests were designed by the US car builders to show their cars were safer than asian imports at the time the test was qualified. Since that time most cars have been designed to pass the more strict IIHS and ENCAP tests so you would expect all new cars tested to pass the Federal tests with five stars. The IIHS test and the European ENCAP tests that are very similar are designed to give some measurable result that can predict to some degree what your risk of injury actually is from a frontal offset or side impact accident. That crash test data is used to determine what risk the insurance companies assume when they insure a particular model of car, so there is a real world impact for a car that does badly in the IIHS/ENCAP test because a car that has poor test results has a higher risk of allowing you to be injured or killed and that higher risk is going to affect the cost to insure the car. While no test is going to be right 100% of the time the crash tests are a starting point. In the real world my W211 cost less to insure than my Honda even though its worth double what the Honda is worth because it is much less likely to get into an accident and more likely to protect me from serious injury, if it is involved in an accident.

Most new cars that did poorly in this latest round of testing did poorly because the new IIHS test for side impacts uses a test rig modified to resemble a typical SUV which means cars designed to pass the older test now have their protective reinforcements located below the typical SUV bumper mounting height. This is also one of the reasons so many new car designs have shorter windows and higher door structures. The other reason is the more detailed testing of rear head restraints and how well they protect against whiplash type injuries that are new to the IIHS test procedures. Until more cars are redesigned, the older designs will generally do poorly compaired to the newer designs that came into being after the newer standards were first published.

BTW: The SMART does not use crush zones to protect from impacts because there is no space for crush zones. The Smart uses an extremly strong safety cell design like a race car uses that dissipates crash energy by deflecting it as the video shows. If you drive a Smart you better make sure the seat belts are tight and not be over 50 years old or over weight because the acceleration forces in a severe crash that make the Smart act like a pool ball could rip your internal organs loose and cause other traumatic internal injuries.