Jack Gillis reckons the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) crash test ratings are misleading. "It's impossible for car buyers to separate the truly good performers from those at the bottom of the list," asserts the Director of Public Affairs for the Consumer Federation of America (CFA). Gillis points out that nearly every new vehicle sold in the U.S.– some 96 percent of them– are blessed with a four or five star NHTSA front crash rating. His Car Book provides a guide to the non-invidious distinctions between models, and our podcast clarifies Gillis' call for new testing standards. Meanwhile, here's the best/worst from the CFA's safety list, which combines front and side NHTSA ratings for an overall ranking.
Category/Best/Worst
Subcompact/Hyundai Accent/Toyota Yaris
Compact/Chevrolet HHR/Chrysler PT Cruiser
Intermediate/Toyota Avalon/Pontiac Grand Prix
Large/Acura RL/Cadillac DTS
Minivan/Kia Sedona/Kia Rondo
Small SUV/Jeep Liberyty/Jeep Compass
Midsize SUV/Volvo XC90/Cadillac SRX
Large SUV/Chevrolet Tahoe/Chevrolet Trailblazer
Well im just shocked! This is the first time this US government has mislead the innocent people. This is just like the 21 MPG claims for the body-on-frame SUV’s that get close to 16 MPG. Its all a bunch of political smoke and mirrors, to get “Consumer Confidence” back in the game and get people to buy more new cars. Your gonna tell me that 5-stars is “Five-Stars”. “Dont worry mam’ your Toyota Yaris is just as safe as the Tundra monster of a pickup we sell, see its says 5 stars…” I think the system should be based on a 10-star system to be honest and give the people the real data not that a Kia Rio scored the same as a Volvo, come on folks you get what you pay for right?
Wait a second.
Did the vehicles get tested, and obtain the scores they are labelled with, or not? From what I’m reading, they did.
So, what’s wrong with labelling the vehicles according to the rules already set-forth?
Isn’t it a GOOD thing for the safety of millions that cars are now safer?
Go look (just for an example) at the earlier and later generation of Hyundai Sonata in their respective crash tests, and it becomes evident that cars ARE getting safer.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/safety-recalls/carcrashtest/crashtestvideo.htm
You know, you can’t even compare older car ratings with new ones because over time they make the tests more difficult. First 30 mph crash, then 35, then 40, full frontal, then offset to focus all the energy on one spot. Today’s cars with 3 stars are probably better than older cars with 5 stars.
I remember a cartoon, I think it was in Automotive News. There were two engineers with clipboards and a crashed vehicle (side impact). The title was something like new side impact regulations. The one engineer said to the other “Maybe this will satisfy them”. The car in cartoon had a cruise missle sticking out of the door.
Is the NHTSA trying to rate cars relative to one another or relative to a safety scale based on dummy acceleration and kinematics? If the latter, a bunch of 4 and 5 star cars are certainly possible without grade inflation.
I agree with windswords and so does this video:
I have to agree with this, especially considering that the NHTSA test is not as extensive or revealing as the EuroNCAP. This is how a Chrysler minivan canget a great score in the US and one/two stars in Europe.
It seems kind of two faced to scream for safer cars then claim foul because cars have become safer.
Yaris versus the Tahoe anyone?
I’m all for a tiered licensing structure. If you want a larger vehicle which can be more dangerous if operated improperly than smaller vehicles then you need to prove you can manage it.
I think better driver training would help alleviate some of the problems more effectively than ever increasing safety equipment. As it is, driver training in the US is pretty weak.
Bancho
Cool video seeing the crash test between the Renault Modus and the older Volvo. Although they say that the Volvo is a bigger car, they don’t actually state the weights of each car. The Renault is shorter, but I would wager that this “small” car is pretty close in total mass to the Volvo. All those energy dissipating beams and cross members have to add weight.
Bancho,
I am with you, but it won’t happen. The requirement would cost money that the legislators want to use to stuff pockets. Besides, aren’t requirements like that really just an attack on elderly drivers?
If you think we can make it happen though, you have my support.
Bancho I think it’s a great idea also. Testing in this country is pathetic right now and seriously needs to be fixed for all our sakes. And the cost to impliment this would easily be recouped by the drop in injuries and property loss from the crap driving we have now.
virages,
When I watched that video (an excellent test, BTW), I paused it before the crash to check the weights. The Modus is about 2600 lb while the Volvo is about 3200 lb, so there’s not as big of a difference as it seems.
Good to see that cars are getting safer. Sounds like it’s time to up the speed on the crash tests again!
Landcrusher :
I know what you mean. Someone would cry that “their rights are being violated” or that we’re singling out a particular group. The thing is when I was in the USAF we weren’t allowed to operate any vehicle we hadn’t been trained and licensed on (even if it were a Chevy pickup truck or Blazer).
I had a good time with it though and qualified on everything from the MRC-107 Jeep, HMMVW, deuce and a half, 5 ton trucks and some forklifts for variety.
Why don’t we test our dummies with arms in the US?