IIHS: Small Cars Are Big On Damage In Low-Speed Collisions

[azulejost]

Link

 

I hope the Fiesta does considerably better than these. 5/7 tested earned poor ratings.

[Pioneer]

The worst performer was the Kia Rio with $9,380 worth of damage, earning it a "Poor" rating.

 

Looks like it was totaled.

[DC Car Examiner]

Looks like it was totaled.

 

Not close...

[Pioneer]

Not close...

 

 

I'm not saying it was totaled, but the damage amount looks like it was.

[NickF1011]

Not close...

 

With $9K+ in damage, an insurance adjuster might think otherwise. Can almost buy a new one for that. :lol:

[azulejost]

With $9K+ in damage, an insurance adjuster might think otherwise. Can almost buy a new one for that. :lol:

 

As the release said, the damage to the Rio was 30% of its purchase price in one of the four tests for a total aggregate damage of some 75% of the purchase price in accidents each at 6 mph or less. The Fit did only marginally better at 25% of its purchase price in one test but in total only about 48% of the purchase price. The Yaris starts around $12,500, so one of the tests was 27% of the purchase price and total 53%.

 

In a way the total amount of damage isn't entirely relevant as it's unlikely you'll have all four collisions. On the other hand, there are some terrible drivers on the roads driving pretty banged up cars.

 

Of the current models tested by the IIHS, the VW Rabbit and Prius have the highest average damage from these four tests. Nice to see the Focus with a $200 average advantage over the nearest competition and requiring about $3000 to repair all four tests.

[jpvbs]

I think that is the highest an Aveo has ever finished in a comparison - 2nd! And the "Marginal" rating is probably the kindess comment it has ever received as well.

[aneekr]

Isn't this the comparison in which a 1981 Ford Escort, used as a benchmark, incurred only $469 in damage across all four tests?

[Michael Reynolds]

As the release said, the damage to the Rio was 30% of its purchase price in one of the four tests for a total aggregate damage of some 75% of the purchase price in accidents each at 6 mph or less. The Fit did only marginally better at 25% of its purchase price in one test but in total only about 48% of the purchase price. The Yaris starts around $12,500, so one of the tests was 27% of the purchase price and total 53%.

 

The purchase price, or price that the vehicle lists for, doesn't mean squat. It's the vehicles current value that the insurance company would be working with.

[lfeg]

Poor design. In a 2.5 mph impact there should only be scuffing/scratching of the bumpar covers. A 5 mpg impact should only require replacement of the bumper covers in the worst case. The damage amounts on these cars is obscene.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

You're thinking of the old 5mph bumper regs. Those are gone. They were reduced to 2.5mph bumpers over a decade ago. 2.5mph is supposed to yield cosmetic damage with possibly some bumper structural damage. 5Mph can be considered severe enough to reap significant damage. That's why I like trucks more than cars. Most trucks still come with REAL bumpers that can take impacts of 5mph and sometimes greater and suffer only cosmetic damage.

[lfeg]

I am not up on the latest federal bumper standards, as they are so watered down they are meaningless. Some manufactures still do a decent job with bumpers. The old style (2006) Taurus is a good example, as were some Saturns (The S and L Series). Audis are particularly bad, as I saw a drifting shipping cart trash the grill of a fairly new A6 recently (car was parked).

 

 

It seems to me that we need to go back to the old 5 mph bumper standard, as this can help control insurance rates. Left to their own, the auto manufacturers do not care about repair costs to the owners. From what I have seen of a lot of low speed parking lot impacts, the bumpers seem to be protected by the more fragile parts of the car, just the opposite of what should be.

 

I guess that I am just an old fart on some issues.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Gotta say l have been lucky touch-wood l have not been involved in a low speed collision since the early 1980's in my Escort.

 

I was stuck behind another car on the ramp in a multi-story car park when my mk1 Escort got wacked up the arse by a careless women racing around the blind corner on the way down.

 

I got out my Escort thinking that sounds expensive, first thing l noticed when l got out the Escort was the Renault 5 FWD Ecnobox colour co-ordinated plastic wrap round bumper, number plate grill was smashed to bits. l walked around expecting the worse only to find the bumper had moved a small fraction of an inch. She said her husband was going to go mad, and asked me for my insurance details, l said l was not bothered and asked her for $15 and said l would fix it myself. All it needed was a couple of strikes in the right place on the two bumper irons with a heavy hammer, and then a quick check of the gaps around the chrome wrap around bumper and the Escort was as good as new again.

 

I brought a spare brand new chrome bumper several years ago for $30 on eBay as a spare for my Escort, l still have not had to use it yet.

 

Gotta say l am glad l own an old Escort with a chrome bumper & bumper irons when you look at the massive cost of repairs of those ecnoboxes involved in collisions at just 3-6 MPH.

[Tribunius]

Everyone is aware the reason these go to pieces like this is to protect pedestrians?

[DC Car Examiner]

Everyone is aware the reason these go to pieces like this is to protect pedestrians?

 

Not at all. It's for styling reasons, cost-cutting, or careless design, pure and simple. A good bumper absorbs energy and protects the expensive panels, and there's nothing that compromises safety in that.

 

And no safety argument could be made about the damage to the cars' rear ends.

[ANTAUS]

Actually, anyone that is sandwiched between a multi-car low speed impact, could easily suffer this type of damage, so it's not really that uncommon, I've seen 4 just this year alone, 2 on the highway.

 

Taking the depreciation of some of these samples, like the Rio, if it does sustain $9K in damage, most probably it'll be deemed a total lose and just give the owner total replacement...Drive it out of the dealership and it'll already be worth that...in the above referenced type of collission.

[DC Car Examiner]

Taking the depreciation of some of these samples, like the Rio, if it does sustain $9K in damage, most probably it'll be deemed a total lose and just give the owner total replacement...Drive it out of the dealership and it'll already be worth that...in the above referenced type of collission.

 

$9,000 in damage is the amount from four different accidents, many of which damage the same components. Unless you're going to replace the front bumper twice, for example, you won't get all that in one collision.

[Tribunius]

Not at all. It's for styling reasons, cost-cutting, or careless design, pure and simple. A good bumper absorbs energy and protects the expensive panels, and there's nothing that compromises safety in that.

 

Actually no I don't agree. There is no better way of absorbing energy than a controlled deformation particularly when something as fragile as a human body is concerned. It is in fact one of the things that has to be changed when cars designed for europe are redesigned for over here. As far as I am concerned the insurance companies should have no say in the design of any vehicle. All that matters is the safety of road users be they in the vehicle or not the cost of repairs is irrelevant.

 

And no safety argument could be made about the damage to the cars' rear ends.

 

True. That point I will give you.

[azulejost]

Pedestrian safety starts by people not walking into the streets where they can get hit in the first place. I would like to know the details on how much (or little) damage new "pedestrian designed" bumpers save a person from impact. If Europe or Asia have such a massive concern to believe exterior airbags and other absurd modifications are needed at the car owner and auto manufacturer's expense, they can have them. They have more urban areas where their cars operate. I hope the US never gets to that point as people have to realize there is danger and risk inherent in every action, be it crossing a street or buying stock. I want to buy a car that is designed to survive a collision with another vehicle, not one that I can let veer onto a sidewalk while I'm changing my iPod, eating my hamburger, texting my friend, and reading a book without fear of injuring someone because I know the exterior airbag will help them. To me, the whole idea of pedestrian safety is an issue that is best and most easily solved by driver and pedestrian responsibility and attention. It requires no design changes such as higher hood lines and rounder bumpers because car vs. person isn't a battle that can be in favor of the person regardless of what is done to the car.

 

The automobile is targeted as the guilty culprit for so many things that society deems to be important. In this case, it's a moving car that causes the harm, and every moving car should have a responsible teenager/adult behind the wheel. The problem isn't the car, it's the lack of responsibility the individual takes in operating the vehicle. Blame licensing tests or the vehicle or whatever you may, but ultimately drivers must be in control of their vehicle and aware of their surroundings to the fullest extent possible at all times. The same goes for pedestrians.

[StevenCaylor]

Link

 

I hope the Fiesta does considerably better than these. 5/7 tested earned poor ratings.

 

Since the Focus was one of the highest rated vehicles in this test, I believe there is hope for the Fiesta.

[Tribunius]

Pedestrian safety starts by people not walking into the streets where they can get hit in the first place.

 

Does that apply to when someone is crossing the road at a designated cross walk? I have personally witness two people being struck by cars at one.

 

I would like to know the details on how much (or little) damage new "pedestrian designed" bumpers save a person from impact.

 

Well here is the Euro Ncap (equalavent to FMVSS) rating for the fiesta.

http://www.euroncap.com/tests/ford_fiesta_2008/333.aspx

 

If Europe or Asia have such a massive concern to believe exterior airbags and other absurd modifications are needed at the car owner and auto manufacturer's expense, they can have them.

 

I trust you will feel the same should you ever have to witness the results.

 

They have more urban areas where their cars operate. I hope the US never gets to that point as people have to realize there is danger and risk inherent in every action, be it crossing a street or buying stock.

 

North America has plenty of large urban centers too. Indeed risk is everywhere and can not be avoided but it can be limited.

 

I want to buy a car that is designed to survive a collision with another vehicle,

 

So do I but pedestrian safety and crash protection are not mutually exclusive. You can have both.

 

To me, the whole idea of pedestrian safety is an issue that is best and most easily solved by driver and pedestrian responsibility and attention. It requires no design changes such as higher hood lines and rounder bumpers because car vs. person isn't a battle that can be in favor of the person regardless of what is done to the car.

 

Indeed that is the best way to solve the issue. However the problem is that people in general are seldom as responsible as they should be.

 

The automobile is targeted as the guilty culprit for so many things that society deems to be important. In this case, it's a moving car that causes the harm, and every moving car should have a responsible teenager/adult behind the wheel. The problem isn't the car, it's the lack of responsibility the individual takes in operating the vehicle. Blame licensing tests or the vehicle or whatever you may, but ultimately drivers must be in control of their vehicle and aware of their surroundings to the fullest extent possible at all times. The same goes for pedestrians.

 

All true. As you say the problem is people. I believe that nonone should have to suffer unecessarly due to the stupidity of others. Tens of thousands die on the roads every year and probably hundreds of thousands are injured. We all end up apying for these accidents through our taxes. So if I have to pay a bit more for my car and maybe my insurance so that some luckless soul can walk away from be hit by some moron driving the same car then I welcome it. It saves everybody money in the end.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Link

 

I hope the Fiesta does considerably better than these. 5/7 tested earned poor ratings.

 

Fiesta had better NCAP crash test results than all those tested in the Jalopnik report, but l am not sure how much damage and what the costs would be for a Fiesta at low collision speeds.

 

http://www.euroncap.com/viewcomparison.aspx

 

 

Keep your distance from the car in front & keep the speed down in a built up area. Classic car owners are rated the amongst safest drivers in the UK, the worst drivers with highest insurance premiums are small FWD hot hatches with a young driver at the wheel they remind me of a Jack Russell dog that have always got to be snapping with inches from a bumper of the car in front, they have death trap written all over them .

Edited June 12, 2009 by Ford Jellymoulds