2012 MKZ, other luxury sedans earn low ratings in tough new IIHS test

[DC Car Examiner]

They're still being called Top Safety Picks for the 2012 and 2013 awards if they pass the existing four tests.

[akirby]

They're still being called Top Safety Picks for the 2012 and 2013 awards if they pass the existing four tests.

 

And you don't see the contradiction in that?

[DC Car Examiner]

And you don't see the contradiction in that?

 

The point is exactly what you're saying: The cars haven't become any less safe.

[aneekr]

It doesn't bother you that a really, really safe 5 star rated vehicle that was a top safety pick last year is suddenly touted as being unsafe now?

 

Who is touting such a vehicle as "being unsafe"? IIHS certainly isn't.

[jpd80]

The test rating are there to give buyers a comparative guide to cross vehicle standards, change that and you confuse everyone.

If you want to improve the breed introduce six or seven stars with tougher tests, don't muddy five star results.

Edited August 14, 2012 by jpd80

[RichardJensen]

Who is touting such a vehicle as "being unsafe"? IIHS certainly isn't.

Opening paragraph from official IIHS press release:

 

ARLINGTON, Va. — Only 3 of 11 midsize luxury and near-luxury cars evaluated earn good or acceptable ratings in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's new small overlap frontal crash test, the latest addition to a suite of tests designed to help consumers pick the safest vehicles.

 

Draw your own conclusions

Edited August 14, 2012 by RichardJensen

[rmc523]

The point is exactly what you're saying: The cars haven't become any less safe.

 

I think the point some are trying to make here is that to the average person, the cars now seem less safe when they suddenly get a 'marginal' or 'poor' rating when just last year they received an 'acceptable' or 'good' rating, when in reality they're just as safe as they were last year. It seems somewhat deceiving on their part in that respect.

[jpd80]

I think the point some are trying to make here is that to the average person, the cars now seem less safe when they suddenly get a 'marginal' or 'poor' rating when just last year they received an 'acceptable' or 'good' rating, when in reality they're just as safe as they were last year. It seems somewhat deceiving on their part in that respect.

When you change the standard, the buyer gets confused....

[aneekr]

Opening paragraph from official IIHS press release:

 

[IIHS news release August 14, 2012]

 

Draw your own conclusions

 

Further down in this press release the following statement is made by IIHS' President:

 

"Models meeting the current award criteria still offer outstanding protection in most crashes, and they will continue to earn Top Safety Pick in 2013. However, those vehicles that also do well in the new test will get to claim a higher award level that will be announced later this year."

 

Hence my conclusion that IIHS is not suggesting that vehicles like the one akirby alluded to are unsafe.

[akirby]

What they said.......

 

2 stars imply an unsafe vehicle - period. Like jpd80 said - just raise the bar to 7 or 8 stars so that existing 5 star cars are still 5 star cars but the ones who can pass the tougher test get more stars.

[RichardJensen]

Further down

Irrelevant.

 

Journalism 101: Write the lead as though no one will read the rest of the article.

 

The lead says exactly what the IIHS wants you to take away from the article.

 

By the way. That sentence you quoted? It comes 2,021 words after the opening paragraph.

[akirby]

Hence my conclusion that IIHS is not suggesting that vehicles like the one akirby alluded to are unsafe.

 

Your conclusion and the average consumer's conclusion may be totally different.

 

Show a consumer a test report that says a vehicle scored Marginal or Poor and tell me how they're supposed to respond?

 

And what about Brady's headline:

Four luxury sedans fail new Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash test

 

That's how consumers will be presented the test results and that's the impression they will get.

[BORG]

This IIHS story is all over the news today, from local to national. I'd say the IIHS effectively delivered their message to the outlets.

[RichardJensen]

And let me guess: The headline is NOT

 

Eleven Safe Vehicles Could Be Safer

[akirby]

And let me guess: The headline is NOT

 

Eleven Safe Vehicles Could Be Safer

 

The 3 most common headline verbs are Fail, Flunk and Struggle.

 

The majority of luxury cars are failing a new, tougher crash tests that focused on them. The results are raising concerns that most vehicles may not be able to protect passengers from serious injuries in common accidents.

BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus all earned a “poor” rating when a test simulated what happens when a sedan’s front corner hits another vehicle or object (like a tree or pole), according to The Chicago Tribune.

Read more at

http://www.inquisitr.com/301987/most-luxury-cars-fail-new-tougher-crash-tests/#8TGF8cgiAVXtGkWk.99

 

i rest my case.

[RichardJensen]

This IIHS story is all over the news today, from local to national. I'd say the IIHS effectively delivered their message to the outlets.

 

Well, if you're assuming that the IIHS is fear-mongering to raise its profile then yes.

 

If, however, you're assuming that the IIHS wants people to know that these vehicles are as safe as they've ever been, and that this crash test simulates only a small number of incidents per year, and that cars are safer than they've ever been, then boy did they fail.

[BORG]

But you're forgetting that not all cars flunked this test.

 

I'm not saying they didn't set out to mislead and inflame, but there is some value to the content provided and some manufacturers are doing better than others. Ford is not one of them in this example, and hopefully the new car takes a cue from Volvo. The video below covers one of the MKZ specific problems which is probably tied to it's ancient chassis , which is the movement on the steering column, causing the occupant to miss the airbag completely. The other problem is the inadequate side curtain airbag which does not account for forward movement, just lateral movement. The MKZ's structure appears to have played a key roll in compensating for the failure of the secondary safety systems however.

 

http://youtu.be/u2Fzp3f-C0I

Edited August 15, 2012 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

Of course the data is useful. And if the IIHS were interested only in being useful, they wouldn't have gone with such an overwrought opening paragraph.

[SoonerLS]

Who is touting such a vehicle as "being unsafe"?

The news media. The blurb for one of the local channels did everything but call luxury cars unsafe at any speed, and it ran several times while I was watching their channel.

 

At least they weren't singling out Ford/Lincoln this time...

[ANTAUS]

It doesn't bother you that a really, really safe 5 star rated vehicle that was a top safety pick last year is suddenly touted as being unsafe now? Spin it all you want, that's the net result of this new test.

 

Well YOUR spin is stating that the top safety pick is an unsafe car now. Facts are the cars ARE safer now than they have been years ago, and will continue to become safer. I dont think anyone said they were unsafe so not sure why you mentioned that spin.

 

Essentially that same "5 star vehicle", was at one point maybe a 2-3 star vehicle many years ago, and these tests have created safety hurdles and in turn the vehicles have been re-engineered to meet/beat these tests and then create a safer vehicle for the consumer. And Im sure in 10 years when most automakers meet/beat this specific test, then IIHS will conduct a new "hurdle" for automakers to improve upon. The intention is to create a safer vehicle for the consumer.

[RichardJensen]

I dont think anyone said they were unsafe

Only 3 of 11 midsize luxury and near-luxury cars evaluated earn good or acceptable ratings

They may not be *saying* it, but they are sure as heck *implying* it.

[akirby]

I dont think anyone said they were unsafe so not sure why you mentioned that spin.

 

The blurb for one of the local channels did everything but call luxury cars unsafe at any speed, and it ran several times while I was watching their channel.

 

It's not MY spin - it's the media spin created by the IIHS press release wording.

 

I don't have any problem whatsoever with the test. If all the IIHS wanted to do was help the mfrs make safer vehicles then they could have just released the test results to the mfrs.

 

Or they could have just released the test results without labeling them as poor or marginal or unacceptable. Or they could have given the ones that passed 6 or 7 stars and left the old ones at 4 and 5 stars.

 

I don't understand why this isn't obvious to everyone.

[ANTAUS]

Well I don't understand why it's a national issue, the purpose is to make the cars safers, I personally don't care what words they chose to describe the issue. If the title were "Luxury cars could improve on safety", I doubt it would get any attention, or get the manufacturer's to do much about them.

 

Which story will cause someone to click on a story...

A) "policy maker found in park bathroom acting inappropiately?"

B) " US Senator found in public bathroom stalls s---king c--k and asking for money"

 

And as a culture we are curious, so you know we will want the details as to how much he charged, how many clients he received, etc.

 

So was the title chosen to cause attention? I would say Yes...

Was that their purpose? I would think so...

Did it work? Hmm yes obviously which is why we are talking about it...

 

But again, if it's for safety, then I dont mind them rattling the cages a bit...

[SoonerLS]

But again, if it's for safety, then I dont mind them rattling the cages a bit...

If it were an independent entity changing the rules, I might be able to buy it as an altruistic move, but the IIHS has a profit motive coloring their actions (or at least the perceptions thereof). They do NOT get the benefit of the doubt from me.

Edited August 16, 2012 by SoonerLS