No Excuse: These Cars Still Can’t Pass This Crash Test
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 фев 2025
- A compilation of vehicles that don't perform well in the Small Overlap crash test, more than a decade after the evaluation was introduced by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Raw video footage courtesy of the IIHS. Editing by Crash Core.
In high school I BEGGED my dad for a Jeep Wrangler. He made me sit down and watch the crash test videos with him. If you think they're bad now, look at the ones from the early 2000s. They literally fold in on themselves
Your dad is a very, very wise person. Now tell us, what did you finally get? A Volvo, I hope!!
@j.b.9581 1994 BMW 740iL. It was my mom's. She got a new Lexus LS.
@@jcwarner90 Good choice my older brother rolled a 1994 BMW 540i into a ditch with the sun roof open, the roof didn't even collapse. Mom got rear ended at 60mph in a 2010 c class and walked out fine, I hit a deer with my 2012 Audi A4 and its the smallest dent GERMAN WHIPS FOREVER
@Carfan678 my cousin rolled my bmw drunk on the west side highway in nyc. The car rolled 8 times, not a scratch on him. One of my mom's friends died in a Wrangler after hitting a deer. The thing came in through the windshield and she was pinned inside because the structure buckled. She got kicked to death by the dying deer.
Seems the majority of ones that failed are full-sized SUVs and trucks likely attributed more mass with inadequate support. Also the concern of intrusion with a Mustang seems negligible considering most of them just crash into crowds of spectators.
yea, mustang usually hit things rear first
Did not really expect to see this comment 😮💨
Solid comment
Where do you do your open mic nights?😂
Mustang has been updated, there's steel reinforcement bolted into the wheelarch and a-pillar.
The shear weight of material behind the impact point on an SUV is always going to overwhelm the crumple structures at the front of the vehicle.
Answer: Get the smallest vehicle you can for the purpose you intend it for, simple :-)
That new M1 Abrams tank is looking very attractive now that I have seen these results.
No excuse to still have not tested the cyber truck
If the IIHS tests it, I will definitely make a video about it! They tested both Rivian models, so they will probably test the Cybertruck too.
I want to see that too ! And the two door jk wrangler. The "roll bar" is significantly more reinforced than the four door . Mine was replaced with a full dom roll cage . With four point harness, no air bags 😁
@@crashcore_cc Cybertruck was tested, and it did horrible, which is disappointing because all Tesla cars were 5 stars until cybertruck came out.
It will burst into flames
@@Troy-y5gno it won't
Wow, that Expedition. My specialty was auto extrication when I was a firefighter and these cars would keep us busy.
I can see the ad, "Ford Expedition: prisoners less likely to escape."
The Expedition is still way safer than any sedan. Most fatalities are in sedans.
@@user-tb7rn1il3q that’s mainly because there are more suvs on the road which are involved in more crashes overall because of their massive blind spots and unbalanced weight. Most crashes don’t even occur between two vehicles but between a vehicle and a stationary object or person so this test is more accurate to a real world scenario where these SUV’s like the expedition would be deadly to their occupants
@ If that were the case school buses would be the most deadly vehicles when the opposite is true. A vehicle that handles better will be going that much faster when the driver loses it. Smaller vehicles have less space to crush and minimize forces on occupants. Blind spots aren’t an issue. Large vehicles have better mirrors and cameras.
@ 1. most big cars share the same mirrors as small cars (a Nissan Murrano has the same mirrors as an Altima and a Tahoe has impala mirrors) it’s called platform/part sharing…also all cars have to have back up cameras and most have 360 cameras regardless of size
2. Buses are kinda very unsafe that’s why most states had to mandate the conversion of existing ones to have seatbelts but they don’t have many crashes because there are so few of them running the same routes mostly in the daytime and they always have right of way and their own designated stops
3. Handling has nothing to do with speed and they are usually safer because they can accurately steer in an evasive maneuver
The Grand Highlander performance is shocking. Did not expect that from a newly launched Toyota model.
It’s an American model, Americans think bigger is safer so Toyota America didn’t need to try as hard.
The asian crash tests always seem to lag compared to the Europeans.
While it’s great that a lot of vehicles are getting safer, it’s unbelievable that these ones are still for sale.
Wait till Trump cuts safety standards
@@tomjanowski8584 This claim is mostly false. While he did rollback some standards during his first term, he never said he would flat out cut safety standards. He also never said a word about cutting crash safety standards either. In fact, that’s up to NHTSA to enforce or roll back on crash safety standards. The president could influence the outcome, but it’s entirely up to NHTSA.
Seems like significant portion of the failures are body-on-frame SUVs and pickup trucks, where the body itself is not load-bearing and is therefore naturally less strong/resistant to impact damage than unibody vehicles.
That’s what I said. The frame isn’t even coming into play in a small overlap crash. It’s all body
Body on frame is such an archaic and lazy way to design a vehicle.
Hence why European models like the Mercedes and Land Rover/Range Rover models excel because Europeans are far more crucial on that point. American cars are built still using decades old ideas believing its all you need
Worst Fear is Car Catches Fire after an accident but your Feet are Stuck like seen on those Tests . Don't buy a Car with Low Safety Report
Don't take advice from people who don't know how to capitalize words in a sentence.😉
Meanwhile 100 million bikes rider in india and 3rd world country 💀
Or after the crash, the car ends up in water sinking.
I'm buying a vehicle I can afford not a 80k vehicle that got a good crash rating 😂
it’s disappointing automakers have began to slip in a test that’s been standing for over 10 years
Absolutely. Especially from Honda, Toyota, VW, which had all largely figured this out before.
Who slipped? Mercedes, bmw, porsche and audi all got high marks
10 years isn’t that long of a time.
@@crashcore_ccI also wonder if you’re talking to a public of folks who are not engineers and don’t fully understand what they don’t know they don’t know. We have a breath of knowledge available but most of us are only sampling clips of it. So, it stands to reason that even if folks in the comments agree with this videos findings, it should still be something any of us watching , should go do proper research on and understand even still this is not our area of expertise.
so everyone has to completely redesign their vehicles just because a new test comes out?
The Driver-side small overlap test was introduced in 2012 while the passenger-side small overlap test was introduced in 2017.
Did anyone else notice that at least some of these tests are from 2016 or earlier?
Because many of those models continued to be sold structurally unchanged as recently as this year.
The grand highlander is a 2024 model! Is a new model from Toyota with a Lexus version as well!!!
The outlander sport was a 2012. Little behind there wouldn't ya say
@@nickd.4512 Definitely right!!! And that’s the scary thing…….. the car brands don’t do nothing about it!!!! Cars like that should be banned from the market!!!
RELEASE DATE. Still being manufactured as is.
proof that big heavy vehicles are unsafe
Unless they crash into a lighter deformable vehicle. Heavier vehicle will inherently impart less forces to its passengers.
Drive your Mazda 3 head-on into a milk tanker truck at 60 mph and you’ll quickly find this isn’t true. The Mazda will go from 60 mph forward to 40 mph backwards in a microsecond leaving no chance for survival. The tanker driver will be fine.
@@grahambarton1942 That just means they are unsafe for other people too lol
UNLESS it's a Volvo made with Boron Steel!!
It’s a good thing that most of these vehicles are not available in Europe
No matter how safe you think you are before a wreck, it may go differently than designed to take impact and you still loose life. Point is I wish people would pay more attention and be careful hopefully to prevent wrecks.
Well said!!!! Many of us are responsible on the roads…… but we can’t control the ones reading texts or sending texts,applying make up,or totally not paying attention to how they are driving!!! Just place yourself in God’s hands and be safe! 🙏🏻
Lose
"Massive cars are safer" - every soccer mom ever. Can we just all stop driving around 7000lb monsters please?
I'd have to agree. No matter how much car companies may not want to admit it, America has a serious truck and SUV problem.
@Cade_Rufus Not just America. Here in the UK SUVs outsell everything else and US-style lifted poser trucks are on the rise. It's pretty simple physics - your vehicle weighs twice as much, it has twice as much inertia to absorb in a crash, and everyone else around it (pedestrians, bike riders, motorcycles) suffers as well. It won't improve in the US until ridiculous loopholes in safety requirements for "light trucks" (including maximum bumper heights and visibility), are closed. They were introduced in the 50s to promote US vehicle production (you guessed it, the only decent vehicles America built at the time were trucks) but are hilariously anachronistic now.
@@chrisburn7178 isn’t estates or wagons and saloons more popular than suvs I personally wouldn’t call a Audi q8 or vw toureg an suv
@@reemaldhaheri4675 A Q8 or Toareg is the definition of an SUV, the biggest and worst kind. Audi literally describes it as a "Luxury SUV" in the first line on their website. What would you call them?
The Ford Expedition is aluminum. I'm working on one at work in the body shop now. I wouldn't put my family in one
Surely it is not technically difficult to solve the problem of the gap between the steering-wheel airbag and the side-curtain airbag?!
Actually it is in several ways. Five point seat belts would significantly improve crash dummy test scores and reduce mortality rates in the real world - IF you could convince meat dummies to wear them. Federal standards for operator competence certification will be enacted, ironically only for driver-less cars.
Eliminating the steering wheel and the nut behind it will reduce the number of immovable objects jumping out in front of cars. It will also permit the passenger compartment to be optimized for survival.
A wedge shaped front end to cause a glancing blow?
Just imagine them crashing like that into a large truck that's loaded and moving 60 mph
2:21 the airbag appeared to lag as though it had difficulty fully deploying, as compared to the other airbags in this video.
Thank you for this video. Seriously.
The most important safety item on any vehicle is the nut that holds the wheel. Passive safety, the vehicle's design and engineering are important but knowing HOW to drive and do so defensively will save more lives and prevent more injuries than anything the vehicle is designed to do or not do. Americans do not drive well, period, compared to drivers I've experienced in other parts of the world.
IQ test schoolchildren every year. Ban from school students who score less than 85 IQ three times. Also ban them from getting a drivers license.
Zdx actually does not share platforms with the prologue. Zdx is based of lyric and prologue is closer ro blazer EV. 1000 lb difference between the cars
of the 25 years of going to pick n pulls or scrap yards ive never seen damage like the over lap test does
Hasn’t anyone noticed that most of these vehicles shown in the video are models that are 5-10 years old, only a couple are 2024 models and one 2023 model, most are 2014-2019 models. The IIHS (insurance Institute of Highway Safety) has different statistics on the 2024 models than you’re stating. Thumb’s Down!
A lot of those vehicles are still on the road today.
@@BatMan-oe2ghOK, but the video implies this is an ongoing problem, the mustang the expedition have been redesigned twice since the models shown and have addressed exactly this issue.... As other brands have as well... Admittedly.. Some brands have not.
@@christianfritz6333 As an example, the Ford Mustang only reached 5 stars in 2023. All the Mustangs before that, many are still on the roads. And it is a fact that the majority of people keep their cars 8 to 10 years now. So older cars stay on the road longer without updated safety features.
@BatMan-oe2gh yes, but as I said the video implies brand new models are still as unsafe, which is noting but clickbait and a lie. Older cars were made to be cars instead of being able to protect the stupid.
@@christianfritz6333 Sorry to say this, but you still don't get it. The title says No Excuse, These Cars STILL Can't pass this crash test.
These tests are done while the manufacturer is making these cars, and even though they knew the results of the tests, they didn't update the safety features on the cars they were making, until they went to new models.
And this channel has a video showing how safety features on these vehicles improved in each new model over time.
A Manufacturer will not change the structure of a vehicle whilst building the cars and will only change when they have to. They will just change the body style.
The base structure could easily cross 3 models over 9 years.
In 2005, China was building Great Wall Utes and 4x4, using the same structure as the 1995 Toyota Hilux. And that car was shipped overseas to many countries. Very poor safety features.
Welp, time to go get that deuce and a half.
As a teenager in the mid 70s I had my grandfather's 1970 Buick Electra to drive and I was that rare kid that wore both the lap and separate shoulder belts when I drove. All of my friends thought I was nuts for buckling up and I was usually the only one in the car with the belts buckled. Fast forward to 1982 and I was coming home one weekend from college. A drunk driver in a Chevrolet suburban crossed the center line and hit me head on. Because of the size and quality of the Electra along with the fact I was wearing both the belts, with minimal slack in the shoulder belt, I walked away with only minor cuts, scratches and heavy bruises from the belts. The drunk driver surprisingly had hie three point seat belt on, but had the shoulder belt under his left arm, basically a three point lap belt. He had massive head and chest injuries from impacting the steering wheel. I was amazed how well that Electra 225 held up and protected me. Of course, I had done my part by wearing both the lap and shoulder belts, otherwise the ending would have been quite different.
Bonus fact! US light trucks have looser regulations for economy, emissions, and safety (inside and out). A 5-star safety truck would score 3-stars on a car safety test; and you can bet engineers aren't going to improve safety any more once they hit that mark. Also, SUVs and crossovers are considered light trucks. Heck, the PT Cruiser is classified as a light truck too!
You can't make cars safe enough when the majority of drivers are idiots! 😮😅😊
Correction to the first part of the video; This test simulates hitting a solid NON DEFORMABLE object, NOT another vehicle which is deformable and not as harsh.
The moral of the story don't crash your car.
Unfortunately in the United States when drunk driving is out of control you have no choice!
actually, moral of the story is that if you are going to crash, go all in...
@@mrl22222Well I wasn't expecting this comment! 😆
Actually, the moral of the story is, "Don't Drive."
Unfortunately, it happens.
Now, CrashCore, show us the Volvo cars starting in the year 2000. Volvo has been using Boron Steel in their autos since the mid 1990's,
Imagine they did these tests at highway speeds.
That Expedition crash looks pretty scary.
Do you know how much reinforcement and weight they'd need to add to pass this kind of test?
I'm aware of some cases where the A-pillar inner was changed to a high-strength alloy, formed using a hot-stamping process, greatly strengthening that area and reducing the risk of the A-pillar collapsing near where it bends at the top of the windscreen. In other cases, the front subframe or the front crash rails (or both) bend outwards ahead of the front wheel, instead of simply going straight forward the way they traditionally did, so that a 25% impact "catches" the crash structure instead of glancing off. It's usually not a matter of adding reinforcement but rather managing the crash energy and which way it goes. You'll notice that a lot of cars are designed so that the front of the car gets kicked sideways in a 25% impact so that it glances off the barrier instead of simply crushing against it ... this is not accidental, it's done through careful management of which way the crash forces are applied. (I worked adjacent to this line of work up until recent retirement)
Hence why American cars are very rarely sold in Europe.
Euro encap tests sign the death warrant for a car if it doesn’t get a minimum of 4 stars, 5 stars is the top standard and most tech that standard from European manufacturers.
The honda Prologue and Acura ZDX, both are mainly GMC based with honda badging, does not excuse the saftey but could exsplian why Hondas new passenger airbag is not in it, honda has made a new airbage specifically for the front passenger, its designed to be more like a mit like a baseball catchers glove, it is in the new civic i belive and resolves the issure that both vehicles have were the head slides off into that open space, honda is resolving this issue but it is a little disapointing they did not put it in either of those two new cars.
Honda values safety more than GM.
I want to know why they didn’t put the Cadillac Lyriq on here because it’s the same platform as the Honda Prolouge and Acura ZDX . Don’t just shame them, add Cadillac as well!
@@whodahellru8124 Equinox EV and Blazer EV are on the same platform (GM BEV3 / Ultium). The particular fault observed on the Prologue and ZDX is sensitive to placement, shape, and deployment of the frontal and side airbags and also to the design of whatever the passenger might contact inside the vehicle, and all five of these vehicles have different instrument panels and different bodyshells, and that could affect all of these factors. The same observation might not necessarily be present on the other vehicles due to differing details of design.
@ I just looked it up a bit more in detail. thanks for the clarification.
If the test fails it cannot be declared roadworthy and cannot be sold to the consumer. No excuses and barred from driving on the road
Not people in pickups thinking they’re “safe!” The heavier the sled the more intense & severe the crash.
Damn I didn't know the Navigator and the Expedition were that bad. In this day and age I just figured that they at least got a good rating
How can the miata so small pass all these tests and have excellent visibility, but bigger cars have piss poor visibility
Less is more
@trevorshark16 no that's not what I meant, I mean that car companies can make cars small and with visibility like the Miata but use the whole safety excuse to make fat heavy cars.
What’s ever more frightening is that the Aluminum Ford F150 is the best selling vehicle in the US. It also tests very poorly much like its Expedition brother. Millions of people buying and driving a heavily aluminum built vehicle. Also the use of high strength Steel is only in the frame portion of the truck. The cab is a death trap
Is there a specific reason they remove the headrests during the test? Granted one might say they do not play a role in a frontal crash, still the presence of the removable headrest may change the dynamics, for better or for worse.
They remove them to get better video footage of the dummy interacting with the safety equipment and vehicle structure. Headrests have minimal interaction in frontal impacts; they were made mandatory specifically for rear impact safety to make sure the head and body were equally supported.
It’s funny how they add all of those traffic safety features only to get rid of what we actually need on our cars 😢
they will make it compulsory for drivers to wear helmets and then it will no longer be attractive to drive everywhere in a private vehicle.
People will perhaps use the bus or a subway. And new connections are build quickly.
There are cycle paths in Europe, which are completely separated from car traffic by the use of bridges and tunnels.😮
I wanna see dacia duster in this test. I wonder if it will continue moving forward unless cut half. 😁
If it were mandated that these test photos be included as a pos signage, I would wager manufacturers would be more inclined to implement a solution
What is needed here is a way to deflect the car away from the obstacle because the energy cannot be absorbed by only 1/4 of the car structure.
Sure it can.
For most Americans to understand the intrustions that's are in centimeters
10 cm is 4 inches
30 cm is 12 inches
This video compares the 2023 expedition and the 2024 grand highlander to the 2015 Durango.
Can you state definitively that dodge has made no changes to the Durango since 2015?
The Durango is a 15 year old design, it did better (still not great) than some newer models.
Back in the day a good solid bumper too the impact, now the plastic crumbles until the wheel and tire is jammed into your feet
Rigid tanks don't do well in crash situations - the energy has to go somewhere, i.e. by being absorbed by a structure that collapses in a controlled manner. The bumper plays only a minor role in a higher-speed impact like these.
People probably think the bigger the car the safer they are. It seems like mostly SUVs and Trucks on this list.
They are safer. These tests are not real world crashes.
I suspect this is an AI summary of the IIHS website
I survived a head on with an un-loaded logging truck at highway speed in my 2001 Dodge Ram 2500.
The problem is the test is putting stress on a part of the vehicle that is fundamentally impossible to reinforce to not allow that to happen WHILE following modern EMISSIONS standards. If you took out the BS Emissions standards, you can make any vehicle pass these tests with flying colors
This. These vehicles have to keep using lighter and lighter materials in order to meet increasingly strict emissions and fuel economy standards
Yet race and rally cars have regulation rollcages that extend to suspension mounts, many have seam welded shells. They crash very well and competition seats & multipoint harnesses keep occupants where they should be without airbags. I never crashed my rallycar with a 1975 shell, but I felt safe in it. Perhaps cars need to be more Saab like. 99 & 900's didn't need a cage, but had to have them to pass scrutineering.
I just drove a car for the first time, my dad's Mini Cooper. Is it any safe? If not, what similar products would you recommend?
Decently safe. A little small but euro cars are usually safe
12 % better. That’s a negligible amount. I’m sure any vehicle can be found deficient on some crash scenario.
Should show what happens to a e-bike. They act like they're invincible.
Are these vehicles for US consumption? Makers manufacture safety features to suit the market.
Love my Volvo
The Tahoe, Expedition and Durango are used as police vehicles too… suv safety is a myth.
I call mad cap on the outlander sport. 65 mph vs semi. 😎
ok, interesting but the old Mirage and a 2015 Outlander sport(not made anymore) seems out of place. Im shocked at the Expedition's performance. I wonder if the new 2025 one has been reinforced. Many are failing the improved 40% overlap test which is testing rear seat restraints and dummy movements.. these tests shown here only do front seat occupants
As cars become heavier, is it harder to design them to be safe for this test?
I always laugh at people who think SUVs are safer
Does this show the competing values of lighter vehicles for fuel economy over heavier for structural integrity?
?
I feel really safe in my 2016 Chrysler 200 that has high marks in safety!
given that the test was essentially new when it came out, it did surprisingly well.
So that's not the new expedition interior because they have headrest and you just showed a 2000 expedition or excursion it look like
If they put a real bumper and frame back in these cars you would see the safety numbers go back up,
It's easier to get good crash performance with a unibody that absorbs (by collapsing) and redirects the crash energy while keeping the passenger compartment intact. Rigid tanks don't do well. You'll notice that a good many of the fails in this video were full-size, separate-frame-and-body trucks and SUVs.
@@bikeaddictbp From experience I was never hurt when driving ''Rigid tanks'' There is a reason they use the old cars or reinforce the newer ones in smash up derby. I have been hit a lot both at red lights and driving '' im a woman magnet '' and all the older cars took the damage and I walked away and most cars were still drivable, Then I got into the news safer cars and the cars end up junk and I end up hurt and 3 times in the hospital over what should have been just a few days of muscle pains, I have seen older 70s cars hit power polls and smaller trees and the cars plow right through vs a '' safer '' car gets wrapped around the poll, I seen a few cars get hit and the junk in the trunk ends up in the back seat where usually the kids are, When the trunk collapse that junk'' Tire ,tools , shopping, BBQ tank or gas can,,, has to go someplace, I was hit and the back seat popped up because the unibody folded up like an upside down ''V'' and pushed the seat up. if my kids were belted in back they they would have been holding the weight of the car on their lap, The old cars the frame would fold above the back tire and the trunk would be pushed down to the ground not into the car,
Surely the best way to survive a crash is to NOT get involved in one. Still, compared to riding in a 56 Oldsmobile in a head on crash, odds are far better in anything from the last 15 years. Newer cars are supposed to crumple to absobe as much of the energy before YOU have to.
I've probably watched thousands of car wrecks on those 'dash cam car crash videos' and have only seen two or three cars crash into an immovable object.
I did 43 years in road safety engineering including half of that working on our national crash database , I can assure you that crashes with immovable objects particularly poles are all to common, especially in serious and fatal crashes. Poles, bridge abutments, parked trucks, buildings, drainage head walls, trees, are all things that come up over and over. I suspect the outcome of these crashes wouldn’t find a place of RUclips because they’re unpleasant to say the least nature.
@@Chris-NZ Makes sense... thx.
Showing old test like was a modern... Nice dude.
Americans are still Stick to full frontal crash test like in the 40's.
Cibertruck Will crumple on it's own weight on a regular 40% size crash
The Dodge/Ram performance is unsurprising given the company's unresponsiveness to other bad results over the years, such as the Charger/Challenger. The Ford Expedition performance is shockingly bad, but Ford has been caught out before with the SuperCab version of the F-150 (which they probably did not expect to be tested as it was not the volume seller) several years back.
You forgot the Dodge Challenger
5:10 so gm now has Crash testgate,in comparison to the vw dieselgate issue.
We heard ya like gates,bro.
1:36 And Yet every soccer mom out there thinks more metal is always safer..
Safety isn't solely predicated upon metal...
Especially the way they drive
1:07 how my buddy shattered his leg in a car accident drunk driver in truck nailed him small overlap style
Volvo did well from the beginning.
New cars are just a suicide bro im glad i still own my beloved 08 navigator. i love that suv it has around 328k km and 1 issue, only just oxygen sensor
Pay attention when driving, you can build the safest vehicle, then design a test it can’t pass, the Nhtsa needs to go the way of the who.
I would ask how often the dummies' heads slipped off the side of the front airbag in the larger overlap test.
I don't quite get why you made this video. Every crash I've ever seen from any car manufactured in the last twenty years had amazing survivability. People live and even walk away after their car or truck has been smashed, rolled over several times, and then stopped by a tree. Half the time they can't get out but they walk away with scratches.
Auto fatality data disagrees with this statement. Yes, cars have gotten safer but there is still a huge gap between the best and worst performers.
Every vehicle will have a shoft spot where they'll start failing even with reinforcements in place. I dont think those vehicle's will be any safer then previous years at 75 mph. Pick your posion cause we'll all get into a accident at some point.
Giant Nissan truck with poor crash performance? what a shock! 🤣
If people really want safety, they should be prepared to make some sacrifices, like wearing a 5 point harness, but the whole point is moot if people drive like twats
The title is deceptive because, "still" is used as a comparative adverb, comparing 2013-15 models and 2023-25 models, which for the most part, you didn't. Like manufacturers are still making vehicles that fail crash tests.
You want safety? Buy a Volvo. They have more high strength steel around the cabin, than almost every other vehicle sold over the last 30 years.
No thanks to Toyota or ford….I thought it was Toyota or nothing with most RUclips videos….LOL, just goes to show you the more you try to push something, the more it’s probably not that great
Simple fix: The CEO’s children become the crash test dummies. Instead of the customers’ children.
I’d still take anyone of these over sometime built 30 plus years ago
I worked on the engineering / mfg side of automotive up until retiring recently, and I am 100% in agreement. Any first-world design after 2012-ish (when low-offset frontal crash started becoming a consideration) is going to have much better crash integrity overall than anything mid-2000s and before. Side impact has come a long way, too.
Wait, what only 12% better chance in a Good vs. Poor rated vehicle? And who would have thought you would be better off in a Mustang than an Expedition??
But do we really expect to hit an immoveable object at 40+ and NOT even break a foot?! Let's look at how amazing it is compared to older cars and admit ALL new cars are pretty damn SAFE!
The point is to make it as safe as possible, not to call it "better than before" or "pretty good" and leave it at that.
Don't you want any improvement huh? With the price people are buying cars nowadays, they better keep me without a hair loss in a crash.
1. On the contrary, a "40mph" overlap collision is you and a big rig each doing 20mph, and one of u crossing a solid yellow line into the other's path. Sure, big rigs are probably squishier than the barricade in the tests, but they also average much more than 20mph. 2. These cars are being singled out because the industry has proved it is capable of better. And some of these cars are big, expensive buses. It's not like the list is filled with sub-20k econoboxes, where u could at least pretend ur getting what you paid for.
Glass half full type of guy.
@@Cal94 Physics says two 20 mph vehicles hitting each other each have collisions of 20 mph.
Safety Third, stop making vehicles into uninteresting 3 ton identical blobs
why does lexus rx score poor in rear seating when others in its class and same year dont?
No EVs here. Is the fire risk too great?
The manufacturer must not be allowed to do the test themselves .A neutral approved test enter must be the only on todo the test al over the country! no matter which state it is.
Ford Expedition legs broke 😅
Design a vehicle that will exceed the law of physics and some fool will drive it off a cliff to prove it can't withstand the crash. So we learn that essentially NO vehicle will ever protect you from the worst accident. Some do better, but none do it all. Don't drive foolishly.
The best way to protect against any type of vehicle crash is to have the latest up to date covid boosters. 💉😉