Safe Convertibles: Saab 9-3 Top Pick, Pontiac G6 10th place.

[Rex Raider]

Convertibles earn impressive marks in safety crash testing
May 31, 2007

BY JUSTIN HYDE



FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF

WASHINGTON -- Summer driving in a convertible doesn't have to mean surrendering safety, according to new crash tests by the insurance industry that gave several models high marks, with the Saab 9-3 and Volvo C70 earning a "top safety pick" award.

Of the 10 models tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, five earned good scores for front- and side-impact crashes. To award its top grade, the institute required a model to come with some form of roll bar in case of rollovers, a feature usually found only on European models.

Among Detroit brands, the Chrysler Sebring performed best, with "good" ratings for front and side impacts and a "poor" score for whiplash protection. The Ford Mustang was rated "acceptable" in front crashes and "good" in side impacts, but had to be retested after the driver's door opened in the front-crash test.

And the Pontiac G6 was the lowest-ranked model among the 10 tested, scoring an "acceptable" in the front-crash test and "marginal" in side impact. The insurance institute said the driver's seat came loose during the front test, causing the dummy's head to hit the instrument panel, while the dummy's head hit the windowsill of the door in the side-impact test.

The institute said it wanted to test convertibles due to their growing popularity. The institute cautioned that convertibles were inevitably more dangerous than hardtops; death rates in convertibles tend to equal those of regular models, but convertibles tend to rack up fewer miles.

"We also wanted to evaluate a group of vehicles that automakers wouldn't expect us to test to see whether crashworthiness improvements in mainstream cars also are being built into convertibles," said institute President Adrian Lund. "For the most part we found that this is happening."

The group also found that price didn't correlate with high rankings. While the top two models were luxury cars, the Sebring and the Mitsubishi Eclipse outperformed the BMW 3-Series and Audi A4.

For its front-crash tests, the institute rams vehicles traveling at 40 m.p.h. into a barrier offset to strike only the driver's side of the vehicle. For side-impact tests, the institute crashes a battering ram designed to mimic a truck or SUV moving at 31 m.p.h. into the side of a vehicle.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...705310359/1014

[OrlandoGuy80]

Great news for SAAB.

I suppose we should see a press release any moment from GM regarding the G6's seat coming loose ...

[Perian]

Originally Posted by OrlandoGuy80

I suppose we should see a press release any moment from GM regarding the G6's seat coming loose ...

It won't take long to write - they can just modify the one used last year to explain how the seats in the Chevy Uplander came loose during a crash test.


Take a look at this shot from the test:
http://autodeadline.com/detail?sourc...04963&mime=JPG

[mr_bots]

Looks to me like GM needs to put Saab in control of safety, just look at the difference between the 9-3 and G6. Also, would the front seats in the convertible G6 use different mounting than the sedan? If not, is this something they changed in the last year or so to cut costs and a newer sedan will suffer the same fate?

[cadillacpimpin]

this article is very difficult to read. i wish they had presented the results in table format. o well... thats good news for the saab but bad for the g6, arent these both on epsilonI why would there be such a difference in performance?

[Havasavana]

Originally Posted by mr_bots

Looks to me like GM needs to put Saab in control of safety, just look at the difference between the 9-3 and G6. Also, would the front seats in the convertible G6 use different mounting than the sedan? If not, is this something they changed in the last year or so to cut costs and a newer sedan will suffer the same fate?

Or at least use some kind of best practices coordination process among engineering staffs. Looking at a video at the IIHS site is not pretty. In the front crash, the dummy's head struck the A-pillar. In the side crash, the head struck the side of the door since the side bag didn't come up high enough, as the narrator pointed out. In the rear crash, the seat permitted whiplash. Clean sweep of screw-ups for the G6.

To me though, expecting to do well in a side crash in a convertible is unrealistic.

[starlightmica]

Originally Posted by cadillacpimpin

this article is very difficult to read. i wish they had presented the results in table format.

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=100

[nascarnate326]

Kappa cars?????

[ponchoman49]

The G6 convertible is looking less impressive to me each year. It weights too much and apprently that weight doesn't do much for crash tests, offers lower power ratings than it's coupe and sedan counterparts with the 3.5 and 3.9 V6 engines, looks too plain on the outside especially after Pontiac elimnated the bodyside molding for 2007 and costs too much. I remember one of the rags saying why pay 30K plus for this when a Mustang offers way more bang for the buck, offers tire scorching rear drive, looks better and is way more fun to drive for about the same money. For once I agree with them.

[guitarlix]

[rsbaker]

Originally Posted by mr_bots

Looks to me like GM needs to put Saab in control of safety, just look at the difference between the 9-3 and G6. Also, would the front seats in the convertible G6 use different mounting than the sedan? If not, is this something they changed in the last year or so to cut costs and a newer sedan will suffer the same fate?

I agree! It is inexcusable that 2 cars sharing the same basic platform would perform so differently. You would certainly think that the seat mounts would be the same.

[artrix]

Wow, the G6 looks scary

[xtremegrandam]

Originally Posted by ponchoman49

The G6 convertible is looking less impressive to me each year. It weights too much and apprently that weight doesn't do much for crash tests, offers lower power ratings than it's coupe and sedan counterparts with the 3.5 and 3.9 V6 engines, looks too plain on the outside especially after Pontiac elimnated the bodyside molding for 2007 and costs too much. I remember one of the rags saying why pay 30K plus for this when a Mustang offers way more bang for the buck, offers tire scorching rear drive, looks better and is way more fun to drive for about the same money. For once I agree with them.

I agree with you. I was first excited when they first announced the convertible. But as time has gone on I to have been less and less impressed with it. It is very plain the interior isn't up to standard for the price that it has. While the mustang isn't a hardtop I would rather have that than the G6. By looking at those pictures of the crash I sure wouldn't want to be in there.

I am glad to hear about the Saab 9-3 convertible since I have been heavily thinking about purchasing one.

[tgagneguam]

I was watching the presentation of the results this morning on TV while getting ready for work. Interesting point that they rightfully highlighted the Saab's (and Volvo's) superior performance, though they also rightfully highlighted the G6's poor showing, too. The point I mused at was the precise manner in which the cars were presented (I'm a stickler for details, I guess).

I'll paraphrase:

"The two best performers were from Sweden, Saab's 9-3 and Volvo's C70... The worst performer? General Motors' Pontiac G6."

Nothing about these statements was inaccurate, mind you. But in the event the reporter wasn't aware of it, Saab is still part of GM, the last time I heard. Nitpicking, perhaps, but I couldn't have been the only one who noticed the wording. In other words, praise and damnation should be distributed fairly to the General.

[CRBoyd91]

I hope the G6 Conv. does better the next go around, if there is a next go around.