Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > The Pub

The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 09-08-2012, 10:39 AM   #1
stevz
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,223
Default High safety ratings for small cars mean little in real world accidents.

http://www.news.com.au/national/ligh...-1226446197372

Quote:

Light city cars' high ANCAP ratings do not protect in real world crashes
August 09, 2012


LIGHT city cars with high official safety ratings are under-achievers in real-world crashes, according to the latest survey.

While most new light cars score four or a maximum five stars in the Australian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), they are disadvantaged by their weight when crashing into bigger and heavier vehicles, RACQ safety spokesman Steve Spalding said yesterday.

He was commenting on the 20th annual Used Car Safety Ratings of 313 cars in 5.8 million crashes in Australia and New Zealand. It is compiled by Monash University's Accident Research Centre with support from state auto clubs and transport departments.

"Drivers can be about 10 times more likely to die or be seriously injured in a crash driving a used car with a poor safety record compared with a top performer,'' Mr Spalding said.

The survey found the safest vehicle for occupants and other road users was the BMW X5 SUV (2001-2008), while the most dangerous was the early 1980s Daihatsu HiJet which was 11.5 times worse than the X5.

NRMA vehicle safety expert Jack Haley said 29 vehicles scored their Safe Pick rating of which 19 were small, medium or large cars, most manufactured since 2001, demonstrating the advances in affordable safe vehicles. There were only 19 safe picks last year and none in the first survey.

However, Mr Spalding pointed out that light cars were the worst performers in the survey, despite many having good ANCAP scores.

"Often light cars' scores don't correlate with how they perform in ANCAP,'' he said.

"The Hyundai Getz is a good example. It's a four-star ANCAP performer, but gets one star in the real world. Also, the Yaris gets five stars, but we only give it three.

"The problem is the ANCAP crash test doesn't take into account weight. The heavier car will always come off better in a crash.

"In the real world, crashes happen at different angles with different circumstances. ANCAP only does offset front and side impact tests.''

The research rated cars not only on the protection they provide the driver but also the level of risk they present to other road users in a collision. Those that scored highly on both counts were labelled Safe Picks.

Mr Spalding suggested buyers should not just look at ANCAP, but also the Used Car Safety Ratings.

"While the top Safe Pick is a prestige vehicle, motorists can be assured there are Safe Picks in almost every class of vehicle covering a broad price range,'' he said.

"Alarmingly, the research shows that while novice drivers have the highest crash risk they often drive the least safe vehicles.

"By choosing safer vehicles, novice drivers could reduce their road trauma statistics by 60 to 80 per cent.''

NSW Centre for Road Safety general manager Margaret Prendergast said newer models provide drivers with better protection from injury in a crash than older ones.

"Motorists will see from the list that some of the most affordable used cars are the safest,'' she said.

Mercedes-Benz and Volvo barely rated in the top choices, despite being acknowledged as global vehicle safety leaders.

The spokesmen for the companies attribute that to the fact the active and passive safety systems in these vehicles means they don't crash as often.

Even BMW, whose 2001-08 X5 large SUV earned a mention as the safest vehicle overall, is bemused by the fact the newer - and safer - model introduced in 2009 didn't earn a mention.

BMW spokesman Piers Scott said the result vindicated BMW's safety-led research and development but questioned the applicability of the MUARC findings in terms of determining the best car to buy based on safety.

"The absence from the list of the newer model X5, which by all accounts is considerably safer, raises questions over how crash-worthiness has been assessed in this study".

Victorian Automotive Chamber of Commerce executive director David Purchase also noted the report didn't take into account the roadworthiness of the vehicles involved in the crashes.

"Even modern vehicles with five-star (ANCAP) safety ratings, including ABS and ESC, need ongoing maintenance and regular servicing to operate at their best," he said.

"Something as simple as a worn tyre makes a vehicle unsafe whatever its age."
stevz is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 10:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL