Hi
Most will be aware that we have the company that carrys out the car crash tests and gives the car upto 5 stars and 37 points max.
The Americans have their own version.
My query is, why are the tests not carried out on rear impacts?? This is a very important part of the safety feature, specially if you are rear ended on a motorway when you are stationary in traffic.
Another query, why are manufatures allowed to put seats in cars and MPV's right up against the rear window?? Can you imagine someone sitting in a MPV against the rear window and an impact from a lorry at 30mph??
Thanks in advance!!
Lucian Deville
|
Very valid question that I have raised on the forum before. I always remember Clarkson saying when the Zafira first came out "why would I want to put my kids within the rear crumple zone" and I think it is a valid point. It then, however, brings up the argument that are they any further away from the boot than, say, in the back of a Saxo or something similar?
Mind you, another risk I feel is the bikes on the back windows, so once the vehicle hits you from behind, do the handlebars come through the rear windscreen into back of your head?
|
|
Always puzzled me too. Does not per say the current tests are flawed tho, just that perhaps they should be extended?
|
RF
IMHO, the test is flawed to the extent that not everyone thinks like us here!!
They feel that a 5 star rating means the cars very solid all round.
The 5 star system in itself is somewhat misleading I feel. You can get two cars EG, a Toyota Corola Verso and a MB C class, bouth with 5 starts, yet difference in the points and the amounts of green shown on the dummy passenger and driver - so there is even a big difference between the star ratings!!
I feel the points should be highlighted to a greater extent.
Another point - the new vauxhall astra has a very good 5 star rating, yet its corrosion wanrranty has been knocked down to 6 years from 12!! more crumple zones = lighter material used??
Regards
LD
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the response guys!!
Bobby: I did also mention cars as well and also feel uncomfortable when I once sat in the back of our son's brand new Fiesta. I remeber the JC comments, and seeing people in the small cars,people carriers right up against the window sends a shiver through me.
LD
|
|
|
|
|
Never been so scared as when travelling in the back of an old Mini - like having your spine out on the road.
|
|
Somewhat akin to travelling in the rear of a Ka then. Horrible experience.
|
|
They actually managed to squeeze you in the back of a Ka? talk about toothpaste and tube!
|
I hope some of you have also noticed that many cars are being upgraded from 4 to 5 stars by introducing a seat belt wearing reminder buzzer.
I have a new car fitted with one of these - but have never noticed it, as I always wear my seat belt.
I don't think that a small buzzer warrants such a safety improvement.
|
Buzzer.
Given that the whole design of crumple zones, safety cage, side airbags, main airbags, is all cnetre around the occupant being anchored to the seat in a crash, indeed providing highly involved and clever seat belt tensioners to do so, then
Nah who needs a reminder to do up your seat belt. Specially one that is nagging, and persistant,
|
|
So, Given that seat belt wearing rates in the UK are of the order of 95 - 96% (Before the reminder was introduced), Does offering an annoying buzzer to the other 4% who should know better worth an extra star?
|
Good point. This is where thet 5 stars are laid to rest and the point scoring comes into its own. See the example we've given regarding the Corola verso v MB C class.
Both have 5 stars by the C/Verso is miles ahead in safety according to the results by ncap.
|
|
Note that the star ratings are only comparable within the group that the vehicle is in. Thus a 5 star small car is in no way comparable with a 5 star big car.
|
True!!
However, if you compare like for like in any star rating, you will note a difference - you also get the overall scoring within the rating and the max score is 37 points i think.
Regards
LD
|
|
|
|
I hope some of you have also noticed that many cars are being upgraded from 4 to 5 stars by introducing a seat belt wearing reminder buzzer. I have a new car fitted with one of these - but have never noticed it, as I always wear my seat belt. I don't think that a small buzzer warrants such a safety improvement.
I don't think that is quite the case. The way I picked it up was that you don't get an extra star just for the buzzer but an extra point that goes into the overall score. The extra point may mean the difference between 4* or 5* but just adding a buzzer doesn't automatically give another *.
|
|
|
|
|
I think your wish has been partly granted (whiplash tests).
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4012459.stm
Hope you have more luck with the Thatcham site than I did; but bad things tends to happen to your bandwidth when the BBC link to you.
|
For those fellow BRers interested in the rear end shunt results, here's a cut and paste from the Thatcham website:
"The full set of Ratings will be available on www.thatcham.org from 06.00 on Monday 15th November"
|
> For those fellow BRers interested in the rear end shunt results, here's a cut and paste from the Thatcham website:
> "The full set of Ratings will be available on www.thatcham.org from 06.00 on Monday 15th November"
Just realised that I posted without concluding what I wanted to say, which was "So where are they then?!"
Anyway, I have now found the link: Open page www.thatcham-sites.org/ncwr2/jsp/index.html and then click on Car Search.
|
|
|
|
From the BBC story "But car makers said adjusting headrests properly could prevent 80% of injuries."
It's a pity they didn't say how the headrests should be adjusted ...
|
It is quite interesting that nobody has mentioned the fact that no testing is carried out on rear passenger safety anyway.
With reference to adjusting headrests, this is a bit difficult if your head is wedged against the roof, as it is in many modern saloons with low rooflines. I have raised this subject quite a few times in this forum but nobody seems to be much interested.
|
It is quite interesting that nobody has mentioned the fact that no testing is carried out on rear passenger safety anyway.
Maybe backroomers are usually driving, and don't spend much time in the back seat?
Anyway, think about the car manufacturers' position. They can make a vehicle with lots of headroom, like the current Honda Civic -- but then they'll find their fine product slagged off by teenage journalists for looking like a bus.
(Said young hacks have probably not sat in a rear seat since they bought their first souped-up Nova, and would regard it as beneath their dignity to comment on the fate of rear passengers)
Alternatively, they can make a car with limited rear space, and sleek looks (possibly even with a shark's face too), and they'll find the same teeange scribblers glowing about how "dynamic" and elegant it looks with its sloping roofline.
So, what's a manufacturer going to do?
Boast about the safety and comfort of rear passengers? Unlikely: no kudos that way.
Much better to ensure that crash testers are reminded that the rear seats are not occupied nearly as often as the front ones, that the front is more inherently dangerous, and that the greatest safety gains will come from focusing on those in the front.
Besides, we've put really good child-seat anchorages in the back, and we all know that it's really only kids who ride in the back ;-)
|
What manufacturers should be doing is giving equal consideration to all occupants of a car. There a plenty of teenagers under driving age who are six feet and over in height and lots of old people who no longer drive (like my inlaws) and they can't all sit in the front passenger seat all of the time. Frankly, for a mainstream saloon to have insufficient headroom in the rear for a six footer is just plain ridiculous. It has nothing to do with kudos, just old fashioned common sense.
If crash testing included tests for rear passengers, it would certainly concentrate the minds of manufacturers on the safety of other than just front seat passengers.
|
|
mackika, sorry, I quite agree with you, and I should have put an explicit tongue-in-cheek note on my post.
|
|
I obviously failed to see your tongue-in-cheek, as I thought you would have had a similar viewpoint.
|
|
Yes, as I thought, it is creating very little interest again.
|
Yes, as I thought, it is creating very little interest again.
I fear that my theory about backroomers nearly always being in one of the front seats may not be far off the mark. (Actually, that might make an interesting backroom poll).
I think that the lack of interest here probably illustrates why EuroNCAP apprears not have felt enough pressure to include adult rear passengers in its testing protocols. If buyers were demanding the data, I'm sure that they'd have done it.
Interstingly, the EuroNCAP pedestrian ratings provide a pointer to how rear-seat-passenger data might be used. If you read car reviews, most reviewers seem to ignore the pedestrian rating (HJ is an honourable exception).
|
There could be a simple explanantion. It may be due to the fact that people belted up in the back seats have a 100% less chance of being seriously injured than those in the front?
|
100%, doesn't that mean that a rear seat passenger would never be seriously injured?
I think if a car receives an impact from behind, or at the rear from any angle, then the chances of a rear seat passenger being seriously injured, or killed, would be a fair bit higher than for anyone in the front.
|
>>100%, doesn't that mean that a rear seat passenger would neverbe seriously injured? I think if a car receives an impact from behind, or at the rear from any angle, then the chances of a rear seat passenger being seriously injured, or killed, would be a fair bit higher than for anyone in the front.
Hi
Rear seat passenger reminder is a good thing.
EG: If HRH Princess Diana had been wearing one - we are certain she would of survied the crash.
Regards
Lucian
|
Interstingly, the EuroNCAP pedestrian ratings provide a pointer to how rear-seat-passenger data might be used. If you read car reviews, most reviewers seem to ignore the pedestrian rating (HJ is an honourable exception).
I wouldn't think most car owners give much (if any) thought to pedestrian ratings, otherwise huge, high, flat fronted 4x4s wouldn't be so popular.
|
|
|
|
