Escape rated poor in small overlap test

[shaggy314]

The moral of the story - don't hit unmovable objects head-on, and if you do, make sure that you get at least half of your front surface squarely on the object.

 

It would have save the HMS Titanic also...

[transitman]

As good a driver that I believe I am (fingers crossed), barring a medical event (fingers crossed), this kind of single vehicle collision is unlikely. This type of collision is most likely to occur on a two lane road where one of the vehicles stray over the center line. I guess I'm not too worried about this particular type of crash and feel safe in my Escape.

[aneekr]

Or the moose test.

 

This is how moose test should be conducted

 

[fordtech1]

Although it is disapointing. I am glad that the Escape is not really mentioned. The new Escape is a lot safer than the outgoing model. I am sure Ford will make some changes soon.

Since everyone is starting to master the test procedures, the IIHS says, lets make a new test. What is the next test? Where is the double hit test? Vehicle gets hit from both sides at once.

Safer cars are great, but when are we going to make better drivers? I say teach people how to drive.

[akirby]

A crash test that is aced by the vast majority of entries is one that becomes less meaningful over time.

 

The test becomes less meaningful, sure. And the organization performing the testing becomes less relevant. Therefore said organization has to come up with new tests to prove it's still relevant even though the actual real world impact of the changes required to ace the new test is infinitessimal. That's the difference between IIHS and NHTSA. NHTSA doesn't need to reprove its relevance and raison d'etre all the time.

[SoonerLS]

Safer cars are great, but when are we going to make better drivers? I say teach people how to drive.

That's the thing that gets me--people are hollering about doing SOMETHING about unsafe driving (drunk/on the phone/texting), but almost none of them are talking about driver education. When I was in high school, Driver's Ed was a high-demand, hard to get into, graded class, but are any schools still teaching it? Granted, my Driver's Ed class's in-car driving was largely about taking a semi-retired basketball coach on errands (and learning the power of earnest prayer when one gal took the wheel), but I learned a hell of a lot about the rules of the road and safe driving practices...

[akirby]

That's the thing that gets me--people are hollering about doing SOMETHING about unsafe driving (drunk/on the phone/texting), but almost none of them are talking about driver education. When I was in high school, Driver's Ed was a high-demand, hard to get into, graded class, but are any schools still teaching it? Granted, my Driver's Ed class's in-car driving was largely about taking a semi-retired basketball coach on errands (and learning the power of earnest prayer when one gal took the wheel), but I learned a hell of a lot about the rules of the road and safe driving practices...

 

Driver's EDUCATION - that's the problem right there. We shouldn't just be educating drivers - we should be TRAINING them. You don't have Pilot EDUCATION - we have Pilot TRAINING. And retraining. And certification. And re-certification.

 

Make everyone re-test (written) at least once every 5 years. Every day I see people who don't know whether they have to yield or not at an intersection when they're turning left or when they're turning right and others are turning left. And that is dangerous.

[silvrsvt]

Make everyone re-test (written) at least once every 5 years. Every day I see people who don't know whether they have to yield or not at an intersection when they're turning left or when they're turning right and others are turning left. And that is dangerous.

 

I think the reason States don't do this is because of $$$...but I agree with you totally. I hate all the people who clog up the left hand lane of I95 preventing people from passing the slower traffic in the right lane! If your not passing or going faster than the people in the right hand lane...you should be in it!

[NickF1011]

I think the reason States don't do this is because of $$$...but I agree with you totally. I hate all the people who clog up the left hand lane of I95 preventing people from passing the slower traffic in the right lane! If your not passing or going faster than the people in the right hand lane...you should be in it!

I-97 is bad like that too. It's only two lanes in each direction for much of it. During that stretch, there's usually 3-4 times as many cars in the left lane as the right. They put up these giant "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs, like that is going to help.

 

Random trivia: I-97 is the shortest 2-digit Interstate highway in the country, the only one contained entirely in one county, and the only 2-digit Interstate that does not intersect another 2-digit Interstate.

[akirby]

The big one for me is the people who apparently just don't read traffic signs. They are oblivious. They make a right turn with a huge sign that says "Keep Moving" and they stop waiting for traffic that's in the other lane. Or they don't realize a lane is ending and they need to merge over until it actually ends even though there were huge yellow signs for at least a mile.

 

And what about the people who leave huge gaps between cars stopped in line (not just enough room to pull out but at least a full car length) which causes other cars behind them from being able to get around the line.

[ScapeTom]

Or just borrow a friend's new Subaru Forester to strike immobile objects at an offset.

 

Heh heh - Friends don't let friends borrow Foresters!

[silvrsvt]

I-97 is bad like that too. It's only two lanes in each direction for much of it. During that stretch, there's usually 3-4 times as many cars in the left lane as the right. They put up these giant "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs, like that is going to help.

 

Random trivia: I-97 is the shortest 2-digit Interstate highway in the country, the only one contained entirely in one county, and the only 2-digit Interstate that does not intersect another 2-digit Interstate.

 

 

I think its MD drivers LOL Its pretty bad in Western MD into DE and improves a little when you get into South Jersey LOL

 

I was shocked at how good the drivers where in Central Southern PA LOL

[Deanh]

Premiums don't go down because all of these things that make us safer cost more to replace.

hmmm, makes you wonder why insurance on my bike is only 1/4 of what is is on the Fiesta....they dont fix Bikes after accidents....

[nebelkopf]

.......and (at least in Florida) more insurance money is needed to cover the ever-increasing cost of lobbyists!

[nebelkopf]

Premiums don't go down because all of these things that make us safer cost more to replace.

 

..........and (at least in Florida) the insurance companies need more money to cover the ever-increasing cost of lobbyists!

[Biker16]

This will be ugly for Ford for a while as the Escape is basically a MCE of the Euro Kuga and based on C1 Architecture

but it's also great opportunity for Ford to review C1 as a whole and use virtual software to develop modifictions to

cover deficiencies in crash protection in small overlap instances. That's one of the blessings and curses of

having global platforms with large product envelopes, changes can be made to cover more vehicles

but the timing of implementation can be a little slower.

 

 

Of more concern to Ford, the Lincoln MKC will now most likely rate poorly in this same test,

will that now affect buyer decisions to purchase the MKC....

 

There is nothing wrong with the structure it is the IIHS bullshit agenda to keep themselves relevant.

 

The test completely bypassed the bumper reinforcements and went straight for the A-pillar.

 

If they were serious about moving auto safety forward, they would stop with the GOTCHA type of testing.

 

There is nothing wrong with the escape or most vehicles that don't pass this test, they simply had no warning that these changes were coming.

 

How can anyone pass a test they did not know was coming?

[johnnyb82]

Either drivers today are not as bad as people think or all of this safety stuff that people seem to think is for sissies is actually working:

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/UsFatalAutoAccidentRates.png

Edited May 19, 2013 by johnnyb82

[akirby]

Either drivers today are not as bad as people think or all of this safety stuff that people seem to think is for sissies is actually working:

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/UsFatalAutoAccidentRates.png

 

Nobody's against "safety stuff" up to a certain point. That point is where the tests cease to approximate actual real world crashes and turn into a game where the tester tries to stump the automakers. That chart says that the safety improvements up until now have been successful. It does nothing to predict any further reduction due to this latest IIHS test.

[Edstock]

Just wait until they start testing for how well they go over a cliff.

 

[BORG]

There is nothing wrong with the structure it is the IIHS bullshit agenda to keep themselves relevant.

 

The test completely bypassed the bumper reinforcements and went straight for the A-pillar.

 

If they were serious about moving auto safety forward, they would stop with the GOTCHA type of testing.

 

There is nothing wrong with the escape or most vehicles that don't pass this test, they simply had no warning that these changes were coming.

 

How can anyone pass a test they did not know was coming?

If all things are equal, why did the Escape perform the worst? Clearly not everybody was unprepared for this test.

 

Incidentally, this make me wonder how the MKC will perform in the same test.

Edited May 19, 2013 by BORG

[jpd80]

There is nothing wrong with the structure it is the IIHS bullshit agenda to keep themselves relevant.

 

Unless you hit a power pole in the prescribed position of this test, or suffer a glancing head on car crash.....

 

The test completely bypassed the bumper reinforcements and went straight for the A-pillar.

 

If they were serious about moving auto safety forward, they would stop with the GOTCHA type of testing.

 

There is nothing wrong with the escape or most vehicles that don't pass this test, they simply had no warning that these changes were coming.

 

How can anyone pass a test they did not know was coming?

 

 

 

I agree that notice should have been give to the proposed new test but most likely it was in response to feedback from

real life car crashes where serious injuries and fatalities because small overlap crash testing was not being done

 

The test is about making vehicles better/safer and when you think your 5 Star rating is enough,

it's time to realize that manufacturers need to reach further and continue improving safety.

[jpd80]

If all things are equal, why did the Escape perform the worst? Clearly not everybody was unprepared for this test.

 

Incidentally, this make me wonder how the MKC will perform in the same test.

My concerns exactly.

 

I's clear to me that some manufacturers had a heads up that this test was coming and were able to modify structures to rate better.

Maybe the fact that C1 platform and vehicles are still evolving from Euro versions is key here, the opportunity to correct a small overlap

impact defect may be as simple as moving an upper rail to cover the affected area but that takes time to develop and approve in the field.

[BORG]

My concerns exactly.

 

I's clear to me that some manufacturers had a heads up that this test was coming and were able to modify structures to rate better.

Maybe the fact that C1 platform and vehicles are still evolving from Euro versions is key here, the opportunity to correct a small overlap

impact defect may be as simple as moving an upper rail to cover the affected area but that takes time to develop and approve in the field.

The Small Overlap test has been known for awhile now. The major criticism with Ford's poor performance in these tests is their inadequate curtain airbags which they could have corrected in the Escape before it launched.

Edited May 19, 2013 by BORG

[jpd80]

The Small Overlap test has been known for awhile now. The major criticism with Ford's poor performance in these tests is their inadequate curtain airbags which they could have corrected in the Escape before it launched.

Yes and in hindsight I can see how that is a major factor but one hopefully overcome by a running change and retest.

Perhaps that change has already been engineered in for the MKC and the Escape changes at the same time?

[BORG]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jpd80" data-cid="854188" data-time="1369007840">Yes and in hindsight I can see how that is a major factor but one hopefully overcome by a running change and retest.

<p>Perhaps that change has already been engineered in for the MKC and the Escape changes at the same time?</p>

</blockquote>

<p> </p>

<p>Ford has yet to roll-out an improved curtain Airbag that falls in-line with the better players in these tests (Ford's curtain leaves a big hole in the safety canopy at the forward position of the door) . The 2013 Fusion also lacks the improved curtain airbags and didn't score as high as the competition, although certainly better than the abysmal performance of the Escape. The Escape also needs some significant structural improvements which are non-trivial and probably can't be done without a major MCE. They either need to increase the strength of the elements (bumper/fender) intercepting the barrier before it hits the cab structure, or they need to reinforce the cab. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>And I'm still waiting on the small-overlap performance of the Edge/MKX. It's been a very long time since they've tested these vehicles. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>In some ways, the failure of the Escape in these tests accidentally reveals that Ford very specifically engineered the vehicle to ace the existing standards, and save weight/cost by minimizing the structures needed to ace this test. So while old cars like the Wrangler can outperform the Escape, I'm sure they were never specifically designed to survive these tests. Is just means Ford needs to be more holistic when it thinks about safety, it's not about doing the least to pass a test, it's about making a safe car in a wide range of crash scenarios. </p>

Edited May 20, 2013 by BORG