Xoutpost.com

Xoutpost.com (https://xoutpost.com/forums.php)
-   Other BMWs (https://xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-forums/other-bmws/)
-   -   BMW Sedan Performs Worst in Side-Impact Crash Test (https://xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-forums/other-bmws/35726-bmw-sedan-performs-worst-side-impact-crash-test.html)

Michelle 08-16-2007 11:28 AM

BMW Sedan Performs Worst in Side-Impact Crash Test
 
BMW Sedan Performs Worst in Side-Impact Crash Test

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293437,00.html

DETROIT The 2008 BMW 5 Series was the worst performer in new side-impact crash tests of luxury sedans by the insurance industry.

The Acura RL, Kia Amanti and Volvo S80 all earned the highest safety rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, according to results released Thursday. The Cadillac STS and Mercedes E-Class earned the second-highest rating.

The tests were designed to show what would happen if a truck or sport utility vehicle hit the side of the sedan at 31 mph, the speed of a serious crash. Side-impact crashes are the most common type of fatal crash after a frontal crash, killing around 9,000 people on U.S. roadways in 2005, the institute said.

"Growing sales of SUVs and pickups have exacerbated height mismatches among passenger vehicles, thereby increasing the risks to occupants of many vehicles struck in the side," Insurance Institute President Adrian Lund said in a news release.

All six sedans were equipped with standard side air bags. The air bags in the BMW 5 Series protected the head, but separate air bags designed to protect the chest and abdomen performed poorly, the institute said.

BMW spokesman Thomas Plucinsky said the institute's test indicated the 5 Series has a strong body structure but the dummy was injured when it was hit by the arm rest. Plucinsky said BMW does up to 12 crash tests on all its cars as well as computer simulations of crashes.

"The issue is that depending on the location of seat, the location of dummy, the location of the sled, the results could change," he said. "This was one test on one day on one car."

The Kia Amanti was one of the lowest priced sedans in the group, with a starting price of around $25,500, but it offered greater protection than more expensive entries. The BMW 5 Series starts at $43,500, while the Mercedes E-Class starts at $50,550, according to automotive research site Edmunds.com.

"The Amanti shows that you don't have to buy an expensive car to get good protection in crashes with SUVs and pickups," Lund said.

The Volvo S80 also won the institute's top safety award for overall crash protection, since it got the highest ratings in front, side and rear crash tests and has electronic stability control as standard equipment. Stability control helps prevent rollovers. The 2007 Volvo S80 starts at $47,350, according to Edmunds.

All of the sedans tested were 2007 models except the 5 Series, which was redesigned for 2008, institute spokesman Russ Rader said.

motordavid 08-16-2007 11:29 AM

Ha, ha...deulling posts, Mich!

I was a min earlier, but just did the link, not the C&P of the art.

trueX5er 08-16-2007 12:32 PM

bad BMW....tsk tsk

motordavid 08-16-2007 12:39 PM

Rather than have duelling threads, here's the Yahoo link
with the grainy vid of the crash testing.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070816/...h_tests_sedans

blondboinsd 08-16-2007 01:04 PM

God this pisses me off so much, WHAT is BMW doing? Are their designers that stupid? I don't understand why a car company that invented the Head Protection System cannot build a safe car anymore? FIRST it was the 3 convertable and now this, not to mention the new X5 isn't anything special from a safety standpoint, vehicles out since 2004 scored better then it, I just may end up with a Mercedes for the sheer fact my protection is worth the cost to maintain it

rayxi 08-16-2007 01:10 PM

Interesting angle for the article. Instead of highlighting which vehicles were the best they chose to focus on the BMW being last in the comparison. Even then they're a bit misleading with the phrase "worst in side-impact crash test". It implies the rating was the worst possible rather than placing last in the comparison. I also noticed the article doesn't reveal the actual rating for the BMW, which was M (marginal) rather than the worst possible rating of P (poor).

Still, it's disappointing that the BMW didn't perform better in the test.

blondboinsd 08-16-2007 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rayxi
Interesting angle for the article. Instead of highlighting which vehicles were the best they chose to focus on the BMW being last in the comparison. Even then they're a bit misleading with the phrase "worst in side-impact crash test". It implies the rating was the worst possible rather than placing last in the comparison. I also noticed the article doesn't reveal the actual rating for the BMW, which was M (marginal) rather than the worst possible rating of P (poor).

Still, it's disappointing that the BMW didn't perform better in the test.

disappointing is being to kind, pathetic is more like it

nupe10123 08-16-2007 01:40 PM

It's a shame that BMW did so poorly compared to the others. I think the angle of the article of 'bashing' BMW instead of giving praise to the other cars was because BMW was significantly worse and then when the cost perspective is added to the mix it's even more disapointing.

Another angle they could have taken was to call the article "Kia performs best on side impact crash test", however, that would not have gotten the same attention.

rayxi 08-16-2007 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nupe10123
Another angle they could have taken was to call the article "Kia performs best on side impact crash test", however, that would not have gotten the same attention.

I think the headline "Kia out performs Cadillac, Mercedes and BMW in crash test" would have grabbed just as much attention and wouldn't have been as misleading.

AzNMpower32 08-16-2007 01:46 PM

I've expressed my opinions on this breaking news story a couple times today. Seems to be bigger news than the earthquake in Peru or anything else for that matter.

Quote:

I think BMW redesigned the interior door panels to be more aesthetically pleasing for 2008. That may have something to do with the surprisingly poor results. I think the '04-'07 did alright in the side-impact tests.

Why is BMW all of a sudden slipping in the crash tests? I know they're safe cars, but first, the 3 convertible got a sub-par result. Then BMW decides to stop offering rear side impact airbags on the 3-series and the X5, claiming the HPS is sufficient (no it's not). And now this...........http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/ima...pshakehead.gif


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:37 PM.

vBulletin, Copyright 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved.