Ford Tops IIHS Crash Test; GM Gets 8 Top Picks

[Stevasaurus]

I've always seen these type of test results on the news when the imports do well. I can only hope the same holds true this time.

[eurohazard]

Originally Posted by 04bonnie

GO Lambdas GO!!!! Awesome news, finally a vehicle I own gets top honors, as well as being popular. (Oh, did you notice the categories? The Lambdas are LARGE SUV's, not Midsize, so they should NOT be compared to the Flex, the Edge, the Pilot, and the Highlander, although it seems like they are always put up against those vehicles. This proves that the Lambdas are not in that same class, they are LARGE, not midsized, this should solve any past arguments.

Are you serious? It shouldn't matter if it is called large or medium....the fact is, it's safe! Congratulations on that. Personally, I don't think it is a large SUV any more so than a Honda Pilot is. Sure they are big mid-size SUV's, but they are not V8 powered full-size truck-based BOF SUV's that most people (myself included) associate with the term "large SUV".

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by goblue

So the Malibu doesn't get it because GM cheaped out on the head restraints?

Smart GM - real smart.

Is there anything the CTS doesn't do right? Bests a 5 series in safety, as well as an E class. Nice!

Gee goblue, some things I thought you would've noticed that are much more significant.

1.) Not a single Lexus made the Top Safety Pick - continuing their 5 year ? tradition in that regard.

2. ) The old Saab 9 -3 convertible did - look how well its doing in the photo - which is better than the pictures showing the same for the three Lexus product that also make the 'also ran' list that you take such exception to..... concerning the Malibu - right there with the Camry as well.

3. ) Now put 1 and 2 together.......

****************

That's a little unfair or possibly inaccurate thru incompleteness concerning the 5 series - it did "good" including all three numbers for the rear - the exception was on the SUV side impact where it was acceptable with a more than decent performance.

The problem is IIHS didn't test it with the extra ( then ? ) optional set of side airbags.

The E class it was pretty much the same although they had all the 'bags - and a very useful lower beltline.

Not taking away anything from the CTS with all this.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by BGH

It looks like every Honda model except the S2000 made it.

Hmmmm..... no Accord Coupes, no Civic 2 doors, and no Civic Si 4 door - all of whom could use it.

You have to look and see why that is - not all are tested which is the probable explanation as to why the Civic Si 4 door is excluded.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by eurohazard

Are you serious? It shouldn't matter if it is called large or medium....the fact is, it's safe! Congratulations on that. Personally, I don't think it is a large SUV any more so than a Honda Pilot is. Sure they are big mid-size SUV's, but they are not V8 powered full-size truck-based BOF SUV's that most people (myself included) associate with the term "large SUV".

As far as getting the award you are correct.

However in the real world, as IIHS points out, size ( mass mostly but other as well ) does matter.

Also as IIHS points out you cannot compare accurately out of or across class with this system of theirs - I think that's mostly in regards to or most pronounced with or whatever - the frontal impacts.

An average scoring medium or large vehicle will typically outperform a small vehicle that is a top safety pick in a real world situation - sometimes by alot.

Part of this is because again as IIHS points out, their test procedure contains a bias against large vehicles in their frontal impact tests.

Complicating all this is that not all model year vehicles are tested - or even within a design - safety equipment cycle -nor are all variations such as the case for the BMW 5 series mentioned above.

Its not a comprehensive list by any means.

Two notable exceptions here out of many ie no listing in their pull down - for any year would be the 7 series and the S class.

Some Volvos are missing as well.

[kenman923]

Good for Ford. They have potential.

Now I know I made the right decision in my purchase of the TSX.

[Koasterking]

I guess no Silverado or Sierra. That's interesting

[Hurricane]

Looks like Acura did very well!

[Beau]

Looks like almost every car made it.

[BGH]

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

Hmmmm..... no Accord Coupes, no Civic 2 doors, and no Civic Si 4 door - all of whom could use it.

You have to look and see why that is - not all are tested which is the probable explanation as to why the Civic Si 4 door is excluded.

I realize the coupes didn't make it, but every honda branded car is going to have a top safety pick associated with it. They're going to market Accord, Civic, Fit etc. not body styles.

Looking through it. They don't have a listing for the coupe version of Accord, Civic, or Altima. Maybe they don't test them?

[ericmvest]

How did Nissan do? I did not even see Nissan mentioned. Probably Nissan did not do so well. Nissan's quality is significantly worse than General Motors' and Ford's quality according to JD Powers and Nissan's crash safety is probably worse than General Motors' and Ford's crash safety also. The public perception seems to give Nissan a pass because it is one of the Japanese "Big Three." Nissan's Mississippi plant quality was terrible the first several years after that plant was opened.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by BGH

I realize the coupes didn't make it, but every honda branded car is going to have a top safety pick associated with it. They're going to market Accord, Civic, Fit etc. not body styles.

Looking through it. They don't have a listing for the coupe version of Accord, Civic, or Altima. Maybe they don't test them?

Actually Honda's usually pretty good at a very straight and non confusing presentation of 'good' safety news - if they follow form they won't be

mixing all that up across the body styles although the IIHS does just that implicitly in more than half their information presentation.

That's interesting about all the Coupes that you looked up.

Buried somewhere on their site IIHS explains how vehicles are selected and how they can be 'retested' - at OEM expense on that last for sure.

Maybe 'we' should look that up - I can't remember how initial selections are made.

Also their press release commentary contains some useful sound bites not 'reported' in full this year - and some chronic bias's in presentation.

Here is that link.

http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr112508.html

[gardnet1]

I wonder if Ford should have had 17? I didn't see the MKZ sibling of the Fusion/Milan listed. The test should have covered all three models.

Discontinued Taurus X and Sable will drop off next year. Outlook?

If LaCrosse improves on Malibu slightly, it will make the list. What is Malibu missing?... ESC?

[eurohazard]

Originally Posted by ericmvest

How did Nissan do? I did not even see Nissan mentioned. Probably Nissan did not do so well. Nissan's quality is significantly worse than General Motors' and Ford's quality according to JD Powers and Nissan's crash safety is probably worse than General Motors' and Ford's crash safety also. The public perception seems to give Nissan a pass because it is one of the Japanese "Big Three." Nissan's Mississippi plant quality was terrible the first several years after that plant was opened.

Check the list again man. There are 2 Nissans (Rogue and Muarano plus one Infiniti (EX35)....that = 3 Nissans on the list. Also of note, there are 4 more Nissans in the "also ran" list that are simply one more test evaluation from top pick (Altima, Pathfinder, Quest, Xterra).

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by Beau

Looks like almost every car made it.

Hmmmmm...... not even close - which doesn't necessarily imply anything useful.