wheel_of_steel

A couple of months ago, the IIHS released a new crash test to add to their current repertoire. It's called a narrow overlap test, and it's a frontal collision in which only 20% of the car's width impacts a solid barrier. That's a significant increase in load over the existing moderate overlap tests. They put 40% of the car's width into a deformable barrier.



There has been a mixed bag of results. So far, they've only tested some compact executives and family sedans with an interesting turnout.



Top scorers:



-Volvo S60



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSYLE55iYj0



-Honda Accord



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOOMR-fTBWg



Big busts:



-Volkswagen Passat CC (driver's door falls off)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU6a_s4SHZw



-Toyota Camry



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNG7Nm9XDko



...The scary part is, all of the tested cars have been five-star rated cars. Can you imagine something like an RD hitting a powerpole at 40? The roof rail collapses in a moderate overlap collision at 35...

Stocker

This test is ridiculous. I bet if they put a 50% offset into a solid block of steel at 90MPH most cars would fail too.

wheel_of_steel

It's a harsh test, sure. They said that about 40% offset collisions back in the day too. One out of every four fatal frontal collisions is a narrow overlap crash.











(Plus it was getting boring watching all the econoboxes getting five stars in the NCAP tests)

Stocker

The statistic is incomplete - what percentage of crashes are those?



I can't see this helping anyone but steel companies, because it means cars will get even heavier still as they try to make the passenger compartment even stronger.



Risk of having this crash is the sort of thing I consider a cost of driving, and there are some forces I consider to be irresistible. I don't anticipate living through any sort of collision involving a bobtail or 18-wheeler, and I don't expect to survive a crash like this new test in any sort of happy condition. Personally, I consider it to be unreasonable to ask car makers to try to engineer around these sorts of forces . . . but then again, I have been surprised before.

HyundaiKitCoupe

The RD is actually a safe car contrary to what everyone says. I've seen them badly smashed at junkyards. They undeniably hold up and absorb very well from all angles. Sure there are cars like Hondas or VW with better quality sheetmetal, but the 90's Hyundais aren't as bad as they seem. They were engineered with collapsable zones. That doesn't mean the sheetmetal has to be extraordinary.

tibbytib

I say kudos for upping the standards. I would much rather be more secure and safe in my vehicle and sacrifice .2 sec in 0-60 or 1-2 mpg then the alternative: R.I.P.

wheel_of_steel

Stocker, I'll double check this, but half of all fatal crashes are frontal collisions. I think it's then divided up into one quarter narrow overlap, one quarter narrow object (tree/pole) in the centre of the front, and the rest is made up by 4moderate overlap crashes. Frontal collisions where the entire front end of the car hits something barely get a mention, probably because they are a) much less serious so don't show up on the stats, and b) just less likely to happen.



In short, one in eight fatal crashes is a narrow overlap crash.



As for colliding with an 18-wheeler, some collisions with semi trailers and pickups can be survivable, mainly due to lobby work from organisations like the IIHS and NCAP. Notice how semi trailers all have this bar at the back?







That's so the collision force can be absorbed by the crumple zone of your car instead of the A pillar. Same goes for SUVs and trerks. Bumper heights are gradually creeping down, and the beltline of cars is gradually creeping up. Again this all has tangible safety benefits over relatively short periods of time - a decade makes a huge difference in safety.







HKC, sorry to break it to you, but the RD chassis is very unsafe. The X3, EF, and RD are all killer cars. Let me quote from the ANCAP crash test notes:



On the RD (sedan)



The EF



and the X3



This is not helped by the fact that the Tiburon is a sporty car and is likely to be driven foolishly. Buckle up

i8acobra

They should do a piano drop test. It could happen.

Stocker

Damn skippy it could, and I bet 100% of those are fatal as all get-out for all occupants of the car! There oughtta be a law! I know a guy who had a clutch explode, there should be SFI scattershields on all the bellhousings! Cars should be sturdy enough to be dropped on their roof from 100 feet to simulate going off a freeway overpass and nobody gets hurt. Plus they should all have bulletproof glass because Chicago. Plus they should all be able to be run over by a semi in a T-bone collision and everybody in the car walks away without spilling their Starbucks.



wheel_of_steel, I take it for granted that I will never be testing the under-run protection on the back of a truck. If you leave a safe following distance in front, rear-ending somebody isn't even a thing to think about. I was talking about being hit by them, in which case being out-massed 40:1 is not going to be so healthy for me.



If they expect to design cars to withstand crashes like these, then they will have to get creative with force distribution. It is a WHOLE LOT to ask of (basically) a headlight and an inner and outer fineder to suck up all that energy. I think it makes good sense to consider sturdy bars to make the whole car skip away from the collsion instead of trying to absorb all the collision forces. It would redirect into traffic, but a) it would be better then putting all that force into a car (and its occupants) and b) the cars are already spinning into traffic lanes anyway so why not? Maybe some super-strong cross-braces so the entire front end of the passenger compartment takes the hit. It is pretty clear that current state of the art crash protection is NOT going to protect anybody with just the entire front quarter end crumpling like a tin can and putting the wheel/suspension into the driver's legs

wheel_of_steel

I'm not advocating soccer mom driving styles, not at all. However, having excellent passive safety is absolutely fantastic for everyone involved - asking manufacturers to do these things isn't the end of the world. I'd much prefer the government to mandate curtain airbags instead of stability control, for example.





You're on the money here. Look at the monocoque of the super-safe S60.







Those beefy upper frame rails are probably what make the difference between having knees or a wheelchair. Also the curvature at the base of the rail seems to divert the wheel away from the driver's legs. Toyota neglected to design that into their otherwise safe camry.







I suspect that lots of safety design is a case of making do within a certain weight limit. The S60 an Accord weigh about the same as everything else in their classes of car - they've just made a better compromise towards safety.