http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_res...ead_acura.html

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/default.aspx

This website is not offical (or say not authoritative), is it?

 

this is a new test that hasn't been out that long. these results are normal.

check out our friends at
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_res..._infiniti.html
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_res.../head_bmw.html


actually, volvo is one that i found with all good ratings.
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_res...ead_volvo.html

of course its a volvo

 

I remember commenting on this test a few years ago when it came out for our TL. The thing to keep in mind was that they calculated the score based on this:

"If it does lock, height and backset are measured twice — in the down position, and in the most favorable adjusted and locked position. The final rating is the better of the two, except that if the rating as adjusted is used, it's downgraded one category because so few motorists adjust their restraints."

"For adjustable restraints that lock in position when adjusted, the rating is based on the midpoint of the best (highest and closest) and worst (lowest and farthest) positions in relation to an average-size male."

That means that if you don't adjust your seat's headrest to match the ideal position of your head during a crash, then you would be driving in the "worst" possible situation. For those of us who use the TL as daily drivers and have adjusted the headrest to a better position, I think we're okay.

 

This organization has become the defacto standard for improving cars safety. So yes, it is an authoritative source for sure. Cars need to meet standards that are set by NHTSA (National Highway Transportation Safety Administration) which is a part of the US DOT. The NHTSA tests are typically weak and don't reflect real world experiences. That's where IIHS comes in. They shocked a lot of the manufactures years back when they started doing the 40mph frontal offset crash. Lots of cars failed this test when they started doing it. The manufactures complained at first that this test was too tough, but now almost all the cars get good marks on this test.

 

here is a different site with a few different answers
http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/acura...le_safety.html
http://www.autofan.com/newsdetail.as...4&mn=3&yr=2004
http://www.internetautoguide.com/cra...2004/acura/tl/
http://www.autobuyguide.com/2005/12-...l/crash-tests/

these are just a few i got from google, took me 2minutes

 

The problem with tests like this is there is no agreed upon standard across the industry, nevermind internationally. When we were searching for a new car for my parents safety was a major concern, I learned quickly that there is conflicting information about each vehicle which makes it very difficult to determine how safe cars are relative to other cars.

 

Tests don't mean a whole lot...it all depends on what you get into a wreck with, the angle of impact, and momentum (mass x velocity)...you can't predict what you next wreck will be with...could be a wall or it could be a semi/locomotive.

When ever I see tests such as these I alway think about Princess Di and how 3 out of 4 people were killed in a Mercedes that was supposedly rated very high in crash tests.

Just drive safely and always be on the lookout for the "other guy"

 

If I remember correctly that Mercedes was going over 100mph at the time of the crash. I don't care what car or what test, not many can walk away from a 100mph+ crash.

Bad example

 

Actualy, the ONE person wearing a seat belt lived, the others who were NOT died...

Brett

 

Not really...either you didn't read or didn't comprehend my post....

Drivers of 18 wheelers get killed pretty frequently...people in SUVs die by the dozens...they're not driving 100 mph...and they have seat belts on

What I'm saying is its the momentum at which you collide or the momentum that collides with you that severely injures/kills people.

A "safe" rated car does not automatically give you freedom from injury.

Wear your seat belts, don't drive like a nut and watch out for people who do drive without any regard for safety and I firmly beleive you can drive anything and enhance your chances of survival.

 

I'd much rather drive a good rated car by the IIHS than one that is not. If you think all that saves you is the seat belt, than you are mistaken. If you watch a 40mph frontal ofset crash of a car 8 years ago where the entire passenger area collapses compared to how cars survive that crash today you will be suprised. Lot's of things have changed: A more secure passenger safety cage, seat belt pre-tensioners, front airbags, side airbags, head curtain airbags, knee bolster airbags, pre-crash sensors, abs brakes, & ESP.

I'll take a car that gets a good rating on the 40mph frontal offset crash and you can take whatever you want. Good luck walking again when the passenger compartment collapses and you don't have any legs left.

Wearing a seat belt is a given, and I'm not talking about seat belts. You could die in 15mph crash if you're not wearing your seat belt, doesn't matter the car and safety ratings.

BTW: I don't buy into the bigger is better theory, so don't pretend like I said anywhere in this thread that semi or suv drivers are safer, they aren't.

 

CHIEFZUSAF,

Maybe I misunderstand what you are saying. What I hear you saying is.... crash testing cars and rating cars does not make a difference in passenger safety, and it's all just a waste of time. Just wear your seatbelt.

Maybe I misunderstand, but that's what I hear you trying to convince me of?


I'm trying to state that organizations like the IIHS (which is funded by insurance companies to help improve auto safety) has definitely made a huge difference to improve auto safety. That's all I'm trying to say. They keep coming up with new innovative tests to make auto companies think and help improve designs to make us all safer. Evidence has shown they did they when they introduced the 40mph frontal offset crash. I applaud their work!

 

These tests are pretty much as good as any other test. In general, improvement on a repeated test often means that to some extent real improvement has occurred, and to some extent the testee has learned how to adapt / design to the specifics of the test.

There are so many variables in crashes that testing for every common crash would require hundreds, maybe even thousands of tests. Sometimes the things that should be done to improve in one collision will reduce performance in another.

The most obvious example of this is airbags. They improve performance in some crashes, but cause minor injuries that would not have otherwise occurred in others.

In the case of the offset test, automakers have had time to design for this specific test. This will improve performance in some crashes, harm it in some crashes, and make no difference in others. Overall the net result is most likely a gain, but also likely not to the extent the test scores imply--unless you happen to be in a 40 MPH offset crash.

We'll no doubt see the same with the headrest test, except we might not all like the headrest designs that result.