Cars with really poor safety ratings

[Sktan10]

Which type of car do you guys think is safer, in terms of surviving after hitting or getting hit? I am refering to body types like sedan, SUV, etc? Disregard the safety features like airbags, collison warnings, etc as these features are independent of body types.

And asumming the same brand and series of car.

For example, do you think a Volvo XC60 is safer or a S60 or even S90? Or no difference?

 

I currently prefer a sedan, but there might come a time in the future where I would place safety above anything else. SUVs?

I also want to know more about that.Can anyone enlighten?

NCAP test is cap at 64km/h,side is 50km/h.

If drive around 50 or 60km/h,i believe most drivers can stop in time.

Is only above 80 or 100km/h and during accident at that speed,wonder how many cars can withstand that kind of speed?

Do NCAP test car with 80km/h and above?Any youtube or video to see?

[Jamesc]

Cars with the higher centre of gravity are the most dangerous.

 

Cos in an accident much higher risk of rolling over.

 

Higher chance of injury if you car roll over especially if it rolls many times.

 

 

[Pocus]

Which type of car do you guys think is safer, in terms of surviving after hitting or getting hit? I am refering to body types like sedan, SUV, etc? Disregard the safety features like airbags, collison warnings, etc as these features are independent of body types.

And asumming the same brand and series of car.

For example, do you think a Volvo XC60 is safer or a S60 or even S90? Or no difference?

 

I currently prefer a sedan, but there might come a time in the future where I would place safety above anything else. SUVs?

SUVs classis are built the same way as normal cars. The reason why they are deem tougher is more psychological as they look rugged and masculine. The fact is they are probably tough due to they slightly larger size with more impact zone rather than the toughness of the shell.

 

It is also due to their height which make them advantage in a impact with other car types which are lower.

 

However the height is a double edge sword and it makes SUVs more unstable at high speed.

 

Anyway I'm talking about full Fledge SUVs like the XC60, X3, etc. Those compact SUVs which are the RAV now are still considered like hatchbacks.

[DACH]

Cars with the higher centre of gravity are the most dangerous.

 

Cos in an accident much higher risk of rolling over.

 

Higher chance of injury if you car roll over especially if it rolls many times.

 

ð»

Buy Volvo SUVs.

They are still safe even it rollovers.

[13177]

Cars with the higher centre of gravity are the most dangerous.

 

Cos in an accident much higher risk of rolling over.

 

Higher chance of injury if you car roll over especially if it rolls many times.

 

 

[therock]

SUVs may look bulky and thus give the impression that it's tough..

But the CG is higher.

Some cars may look less tough but many modern cars will get 5 stars in safety tests due to their airbags and crumple zones.

The trouble comes when the same car is sold without the full complement of airbags.. 

 

Also, some cars have really thin metalwork, and rely on the crumple zones, but there won't be much car left to repair ... just see the car that tried to climb the overhead bridge to escape the cockroaches :) 

[andrewyewkc]

Help me understand this Euro NCAP thingy as I am beginning to feel cynical about this organisation just like the way I feel about EU emission standards all along.

 

From the video, you can see that the Punto's crash structure didn't crumble except where it should. There was no deformation of the A-pillars and the doors were unaffected. Back in 2005, this generation of Punto was one of the first to get a 5* NCAP rating.

 

Today it scores 0?? The crash structure is worth nothing now?

 

Or is the Zero due to a lack of electronic nannying collision avoidance technologies like lane departure, radar cruise control and autonomous e-braking, rather than any structural deficiencies? Is it wise to place too much emphasis on collision avoidance rather than collision mitigation? 

 

Manufacturers can tailor their cars to pass these tests with flying colours by piling on the electronic nannies but do they really protect you in a unavoidable crash? Just like how car makers tailor the cars to meet emission testing and state astronomical fuel efficiency figures that are all but unachievable in real life driving?

 

Can some kind soul please enlighten me and help me regain some faith in these organisations.

[Lala81]

Which type of car do you guys think is safer, in terms of surviving after hitting or getting hit? I am refering to body types like sedan, SUV, etc? Disregard the safety features like airbags, collison warnings, etc as these features are independent of body types.

And asumming the same brand and series of car.

For example, do you think a Volvo XC60 is safer or a S60 or even S90? Or no difference?

 

I currently prefer a sedan, but there might come a time in the future where I would place safety above anything else. SUVs?

 

if my kids are seated behind. always an executive sedan.

Unless u got those large 7 seater SUVs with quite a fair crumple area before the middle row.

 

But got plus minus also lah. Sedans shorter maybe can partly go under large vehicles like tipper trucks. But on the other hand the tipper truck may destabilise the crossover/SUV into toppling over.

But if a tipper truck goes after u, don't die already laugh liao 

[Columbian78]

if my kids are seated behind. always an executive sedan.

Unless u got those large 7 seater SUVs with quite a fair crumple area before the middle row.

 

But got plus minus also lah. Sedans shorter maybe can partly go under large vehicles like tipper trucks. But on the other hand the tipper truck may destabilise the crossover/SUV into toppling over.

But if a tipper truck goes after u, don't die already laugh liao

I am also particular about having some amount of material before the last row of passengers.

There are many scenarios and no single car design can mitigate every single hazards identified.

For example having seat belts fastened may not always be the safe choice but there are more scenarios that it will save lives than not having it. Hence recommended and mandated by law.

 

My next question, for the sedan case. In the scenario that other car crash into your car from behind, would it make a difference if you had a spare tire behind in the boot well or not? Let's remove the extreme case of a heavy truck crashing t full speed or a light bump where spare tire or not probably makes no difference. This is something that I have yet to find scientific recommendations by internet search. Another question is babyseat on the left or right (center is safest with belted, but let's assume center is not an option).inalso cannot find any recommendations base on statistical analysis.

Edited February 1, 2018 by Columbian78

[DACH]

I am also particular about having some amount of material before the last row of passengers.

There are many scenarios and no single car design can mitigate every single hazards identified.

For example having seat belts fastened may not always be the safe choice but there are more scenarios that it will save lives than not having it. Hence recommended and mandated by law.

 

My next question, for the sedan case. In the scenario that other car crash into your car from behind, would it make a difference if you had a spare tire behind in the boot well or not? Let's remove the extreme case of a heavy truck crashing t full speed or a light bump where spare tire or not probably makes no difference. This is something that I have yet to find scientific recommendations by internet search. Another question is babyseat on the left or right (center is safest with belted, but let's assume center is not an option).inalso cannot find any recommendations base on statistical analysis.

 

The spare tyre can act in both ways in a rear collision by a heavy vehicle, as in: 

- act as an obstruction to prevent crashing into the rear seats. However if the spare tyre is mounted too low, it may defeat this purpose since it may just go under the heavy vehicle

- act as hazard, as in it may just crush into the rear seats as well, if it dislodges from it spare tyre well in the collision. Just like a frontal collision whereby the fate of the frontal passengers is decided by the design of the engine, whether it will move under the chassis or crash into the frontal interior and cause hurt to the frontal passengers.

[Pocus]

I am also particular about having some amount of material before the last row of passengers.

There are many scenarios and no single car design can mitigate every single hazards identified.

For example having seat belts fastened may not always be the safe choice but there are more scenarios that it will save lives than not having it. Hence recommended and mandated by law.

 

My next question, for the sedan case. In the scenario that other car crash into your car from behind, would it make a difference if you had a spare tire behind in the boot well or not? Let's remove the extreme case of a heavy truck crashing t full speed or a light bump where spare tire or not probably makes no difference. This is something that I have yet to find scientific recommendations by internet search. Another question is babyseat on the left or right (center is safest with belted, but let's assume center is not an option).inalso cannot find any recommendations base on statistical analysis.

Having a spare tyre at the back will not mitigate rear impact as the wheel compartment are designed as a crumble zone too. It's the chassis h-frame that ebsorb and dissipate the impact. The spare tyre acting as a buffer is merely a myth. If you really want the spare tire to act as a buffer, this is the correct way!!

 

[Pocus]

For babyseats, since I sometimes travel with just my kid, I will put right behind me.

 

This is by logic:

 

1)in an imminent impact, I can steer the car to let it impact the left side without worrying about both our safety. A single file seating arrangment minimize the exposure to impact.

 

2) if I pick up passenger having the childseatat my side will allow the passenger to enter my car from the kerb side which is safer...

 

3) centre seating is no no as it expose the kid to the full view of the impact and possibly the shrapnel too.. in fact many child seats mentioned this in their instructions..

Edited February 2, 2018 by Pocus

[Columbian78]

For babyseats, since I sometimes travel with just my kid, I will put right behind me.

 

This is by logic:

 

1)in an imminent impact, I can steer the car to let it impact the left side without worrying about both our safety. A single file seating arrangment minimize the exposure to impact.

 

2) if I pick up passenger having the childseatat my side will allow the passenger to enter my car from the kerb side which is safer...

 

3) centre seating is no no as it expose the kid to the full view of the impact and possibly the shrapnel too.. in fact many child seats mentioned this in their instructions..

My child seat is currently behind me as well.

 

I have read reputable articles that say center rear is the safest. No position is perfect of cos. Center rear is the same logic as not sitting too close to the rear hatch door, having buffer space. Most accidents are not severe. A non severe impact may be 1 or 2 foot impact into the car. That's enough to seriously injure a person sitting right next to the car exterior. When the impact comes from the front, anywhere is at risk. I personally believe center rear is the safest seat to be sitting adult or child. Comfort aside. It is where the mitigations are highest. I never place my child seat there only due to admin reasons.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Columbian78

[therock]

Is it worth paying for safety features?

Sometimes we pay for things we hope we never use but when we need to, we will be very glad we did.

Recently my wife longer than usual to react to a sudden braking of a long length of cars ahead.

If not for the distance detection and active braking we may have to pay for all the cars ahead. And the last car was a Maserati..

I think even if I sold my car I may not be able to pay for that car..

[DACH]

Is it worth paying for safety features?

Sometimes we pay for things we hope we never use but when we need to, we will be very glad we did.

Recently my wife longer than usual to react to a sudden braking of a long length of cars ahead.

If not for the distance detection and active braking we may have to pay for all the cars ahead. And the last car was a Maserati..

I think even if I sold my car I may not be able to pay for that car..

 

It's good to have, to protect yourself in times of accidents.

Even the safest drivers may make mistakes sometimes.

And you may be a safe driver, but doesn't mean others are safe. 

Other cars may hit yours even you comply to all traffic rules.

Let's don't be too complacent when driving.