Ford, Subaru, VW win insurance industry picks, "Toyota is Shut Out"

[PhishPhood]

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

Be careful of any self-appointed group that has an agenda beyond federal mandates. The cars and trucks have met federally-mandated safety standards. Anything beyond those mandates is part of the IIHS agenda.
For example, they would say that any vehicle that doesn't pass ITS roof-strength tests cannot receive THEIR highest score. Therefore, all convertibles cannot pass THEIR "safety" tests.
DO NOT BLINDLY ACCEPT THEIR AGENDA AND THEIR SELF-APPOINTED, SELF-DETERMINED "SAFETY" RESULTS.

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

Since the IIHS decides what tests to run and the other critieria, they could decide that any car or truck that doesn't have run-flat tires as standard equipment cannot get the highest safety score, they could force car companies to make those tires standard to be "IIHS Safety Picks." Or they could decide that any car or truck that doesn't come standard with low-rolling resistance tires doesn't meet their self-annointed standards, or any of a whole host of arbitrary agendas. Don't trust them!

The IIHS ( read: insurance companies ) don't give a rat's azz what anyone else thinks, believes or rates. It is a private group that issues its own ratings. It has every right to do so.

However...the underwriters of these for profit companies also base their loss stats and risks and thus their premiums on what the IIHS finds. Neither you nor I nor the NHTSA or Toyota nor MB has any input into these decisions. They don't ask our opinions either. They just do it.

But what the IIHS also has is the bully pulpit. You will NEVER see any official from the DOT/NHTSA on any program promoting their new tests and new results. The NHTSA will never promote one vehicle over another due to the test results. The NHTSA is part of the political body that is the US Gov't. It has to be neutral.

The IIHS though is all over the news all the time with new tests, new results, new rankings because it's their job to get drivers to leave old safety traps by the side of the road and get into new safer vehicles. If that means that they have to trash Toyota or roll Ford under the bus or declare that the Cavalier is the single unsafest auto on the road, then they will do that in a heartbeat. It doesn't have to be neutral in any way.

Why? Because that's how it's masters the insurance companies make money, receiving premiums but reducing the amount of claims they have to payout. MONEY, MONEY, MONEY. That's all that matters. Actually that's a very pure ethos as long as you understand the source.

[PhishPhood]

Originally Posted by Buick61

What do you mean "the prices of the vehicles we will drive in the future just shot up again?"

There are numerous cars on the market that meet the IIHS's high standards, and they're not significantly more costly than their competitors. The Jeep Patriot starts at $18,500. Top Safety pick and only $18,500? Seems like a deal.

Numerous? There are 27 models in the whole industry including all makes.

OK so those vehicles that didn't make the grade in terms of roof crush strength...what do the vehicle makers do to bring them into conformity with the Malibu and the Camry? Ford, Nissan and Honda have to spend money to redesign the pillars. This costs money.

What about the fact that every truck in NA now doesn't qualify as a TOP PICK. Neither does any full sized SUV...none qualify. When the vehicle makers spend money who is the eventual payer?

[doh]

Originally Posted by PhishPhood

Numerous? There are 27 models in the whole industry including all makes.

OK so those vehicles that didn't make the grade in terms of roof crush strength...what do the vehicle makers do to bring them into conformity with the Malibu and the Camry? Ford, Nissan and Honda have to spend money to redesign the pillars. This costs money.

What about the fact that every truck in NA now doesn't qualify as a TOP PICK. Neither does any full sized SUV...none qualify. When the vehicle makers spend money who is the eventual payer?

IIHS has helped us all Greatly. It has made motoring much more safe, for you and I.

It doesn't look at Accident avoidance, Many new cars with ESC could avoid these accidents. But the truth be known. I want to know What crumple Zones, Front/Rear/Side and Roof. My car has.

IIHS does test EVERY vehicle the EXACT same way.

No Bias. Or should I say "Without Bias"

No Car Company paying them off. They have but one mission. "To save Insurance Companpies Money"

[PhishPhood]

Originally Posted by doh

IIHS has helped us all Greatly. It has made motoring much more safe, for you and I.

It doesn't look at Accident avoidance, Many new cars with ESC could avoid these accidents. But the truth be known. I want to know What crumple Zones, Front/Rear/Side and Roof. My car has.

IIHS does test EVERY vehicle the EXACT same way.

No Bias. Or should I say "Without Bias"

No Car Company paying them off. They have but one mission. "To save Insurance Companpies Money"

I couldn't agree more.

[brian5o]

Originally Posted by 1G6

Any Toyota "safety picks" are obviously null and void at this point.

I think that they do provide safety when you begin to get car-jacked and the accelerator sticks!

[brian5o]

Originally Posted by Michael_S

The IIHS instituted a roof strength test this year, and any vehicle it hasn't tested yet was left off this list!

In no particular order, the following vehicles might qualify for "Top Safety Pick" and nothing known is keeping them off the list, the IIHS just didn't test their roof strength yet:
Ford F-150
Ford Flex
Ford Edge
Chevy Equinox
Chevy Traverse
GMC Terrain
GMC Acadia
Buick Enclave
Hyundai Santa Fe
Hyundai Veracruz
Saturn Vue
Saturn Outlook
Nissan Murano
Toyota Highlander
Toyota FJCruiser
Toyota Tundra
Toyota Tacoma
Mazda CX-9
Audi Q7
Honda Ridgeline
Honda Odyssey
Kia Sedona

The press release is grossly unfair to many automakers (note that GM has 7 vehicles that are eligible, and 5 of them are still in production!), the IIHS should explicitly mention that many vehicles might make the list but weren't tested yet.

Good point, I agree 100%.

[brian5o]

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

Be careful of any self-appointed group that has an agenda beyond federal mandates. The cars and trucks have met federally-mandated safety standards. Anything beyond those mandates is part of the IIHS agenda.
For example, they would say that any vehicle that doesn't pass ITS roof-strength tests cannot receive THEIR highest score. Therefore, all convertibles cannot pass THEIR "safety" tests.
DO NOT BLINDLY ACCEPT THEIR AGENDA AND THEIR SELF-APPOINTED, SELF-DETERMINED "SAFETY" RESULTS.

Well said!

[brian5o]

Originally Posted by JeffInDFW

As a Viper owner, I had to point out the ranking for "insurance losses" seem to show that when a Viper owner crashes his car, he does a VERY good job at making it a spectacular event! Look at that number!!!

http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/co...004-2006&cls=4
http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/co...006-2008&cls=4

That was hilarious!!!! Thanks for sharing!

[skylark68]

Seems like the big winners are Subaru, VW, and Chrysler. Ford made it to the top mostly because of the Volvo line. Chrysler should have been in that headline.

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by goochman

Last time I checked (granted it was 2 years ago) - CR would not give a car a recommended rating if they didnt not get good marks in some IIHS tests.

The test that disqualified a lot of vehicles is the roof strength test, which is brand new. So I don't think we can call Consumer Reports hypocritical for not using it when it's new.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by PhishPhood

The IIHS ( read: insurance companies ) don't give a rat's azz what anyone else thinks, believes or rates. -

- Why? Because that's how it's masters the insurance companies make money, receiving premiums but reducing the amount of claims they have to payout. MONEY, MONEY, MONEY. That's all that matters. Actually that's a very pure ethos as long as you understand the source.

Good start, and a good end but you left the most important, far larger part out about the 'money'.

And that of course is the other side of the house - ie the enormous, largely 'unknown', and almost completely unregulated investment / asset portfolio management operations.

Keep in mind this applies to all Insurance receipts and premiums etc......

Given how they (IIHS) have conducted themselves ......including writing their press releases..... looks like some maybe short Toyota & long Ford - which would be a real switcheroo compared to the past.

Well, if so - fantastic.

Can't wait 'till they have a piece of GM and perhaps some of Fiat / Chrysler - or in the right part of anything related.