Holden & Toyota Refusing To Supply Commodores & Aurions For Independent Crash Testing

[JoeT]

Crash Test Stand-Off

Bill McKinnon
4 May 2007
www.drive.com.au

Holden and Toyota are refusing to supply Commodores and Aurions for independent scrutiny.

In a major snub to the Australian New Car Assessment Program, the independent crash test scheme, Toyota and Holden have both refused an opportunity for their large Aurion and Commodore sedans to become the first Australian made vehicles to carry the maximum five-star safety rating.

ANCAP has completed initial testing, for front and side impact protection, on Aurion and Commodore, using four cars bought with its own funds.

It is now asking Toyota and Holden each to supply a third car and pay for the final stage of the tests, which involve another side impact, this time against a pole rather than another (simulated) vehicle.

Click here to continue article

[mbukukanyau]

well, if its a gov't program, why do the Fed's not fund it?

[member12]

I don't see why they should have to supply anything. It's not as though it is the company's responsibility.

Whoever is doing the crash test should buy the car.

[asim]

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

well, if its a gov't program, why do the Fed's not fund it?

In the article it says that the crash tests are from an independent firm. I wonder why both Holden and Toyota are being stingy in giving up a couple cars. Do they think that their car will get a bad reputation if it goes under these tests?

[chinamonty]

If it mandatory then they have to if not then why should they unless they se a commercial advantage to it.
In our industry (kitchen equipment) we are being forced to have equipment approved by a body called NSF who seem to have become a defacto standard in America. It is not compulsory but buyers now expect it so it a commercial necessity and of course the costs have to be passed on. It is as costly as having a tariff.

[mbukukanyau]

Originally Posted by chinamonty

If it mandatory then they have to if not then why should they unless they se a commercial advantage to it.
In our industry (kitchen equipment) we are being forced to have equipment approved by a body called NSF who seem to have become a defacto standard in America. It is not compulsory but buyers now expect it so it a commercial necessity and of course the costs have to be passed on. It is as costly as having a tariff.

Well, Toyota should give becouse its foreign

[Stormin]

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

Well, Toyota should give becouse its foreign

In Australia, Toyota and GM are both foreign.

[BBDOS CV8]

ANCAP usually buys new cars off dealer lots and does the testing itself without referrence to the car makers. Holden (and probably Toyota Oz) don't officially subscribe to ANCAP standards which are based on Euro NCAP testing. Holden's position is the NCAP standard offset and side impact tests are not representative of real world - that makers can optimise their cars for these tests at the expense of overall crash protection. Holden has worked since 1990 on crash analysis and car design with Monash University Accident Research Centre in Melbourne, who have examined literally thousands of crashed Commodores and Holden has incorporated the findings into its' fleet.

MUARC

I am suprised ANCAP asked for cars - they make a big song and dance about how independent they are. The possibility is always there that the car company might supply a ringer.

Having said that, I'm sure a curtain-airbag equipped VE would walk in 4-4.5 stars. The older VY-VZ was a 3.5 star car even without side airbags, and the Monaro 4-stars without the bonus points of a side-collision test.

[roteague]

Originally Posted by Stormin

In Australia, Toyota and GM are both foreign.

But Holden is not.

[redimpss5]

I know Toyota is having problems, but I did not know Holden was also?

[mikmak]

What problems?

[Stormin]

Originally Posted by roteague

But Holden is not.

I know where you're coming from but in reality, both are foreign owned companies manufacturing in Australia. Holden was bought out by GM in 1931 and has been a wholly-owned subsidiary for decades. Toyota Australia has its roots in Thiess and Australian Motor Industries.

[TKR]

My understanding of this is that Euro NCAP, NCAP, and ANCAP is a independant crash test company.

It is independant but as a company they also have to make a profit (or at least look like they are trying). If manufacturers start giving vehicles to them the some impartiality will surely be eroded. Also, I could imagine NCAP starting to charge the manufacturers for crash data.

[roteague]

Originally Posted by Stormin

I know where you're coming from but in reality, both are foreign owned companies manufacturing in Australia. Holden was bought out by GM in 1931 and has been a wholly-owned subsidiary for decades. Toyota Australia has its roots in Thiess and Australian Motor Industries.

Foreign owned, yes. But, Holden has a unique product line; it is very obviously Australian. Toyota Australia has a product line that is very Japanese, in fact, most of their product line is sold elsewhere in the world.

[ford&holden]

Originally Posted by roteague

Foreign owned, yes. But, Holden has a unique product line; it is very obviously Australian. Toyota Australia has a product line that is very Japanese, in fact, most of their product line is sold elsewhere in the world.

Correct, if Toyota developed the Aurion like Ford and Holden have the commodore and falcon i'd be more inclined to say Toyota is more aussie but as it stands, they simply adapt the Aurion for local tastes not wholly develop it in Australia.
I don't see why Holden or toyota should pay for vehicles to be crash tested...