mtc46jw

Just to be clear, I did mean a 2 ton capacity truck! Which weighs what 6-7000 lbs? And yes, he did rock my world but the crumple zones did absorb the energy transfer as it was designed to do on the accord, regardless of the F=M x Acc. difference.

LaCostaRacer

The 4G TL was designed before these new standards took affect so it's natural that newer designed cars like the Kia and even the Camry are scoring better. I notice other cars in the TLs size and design age (like the Maxima) have <4 stars. Two stars is a little tough to take- especially if something like a Scion IQ (not tested yet) does better in the future. The trend is the newer cars are doing better. This data certainly shows Kia's rise in stature- Kia is undercutting Japanese/European brands in value and now in safety too.

phil17

IMHO, i've always felt Honda designed cars to do well in govt testing and never really go beyond the call of duty. They're always caught off guard when new tests come into effect. a couple years ago it was the roof test where most of their products did poorly (some still do today).

As a owner of a 2010 TL, i know that my other car (the GLK) is significantly safer in all types of real world crash situations. It's something you can feel simply by closing the door. I really hope Acura/Honda gets their act together so owners like us know we're supporting a company that pays more than lip service to safely (how bout better OEM tires for starters).

This post isn't to piss anyone off. We all bought a TL because of it's feature, performance and the perception Honda builds really safe car. For perspective new owners, I wouldn't even consider this car right now. My SO drives the GLK because i know it's safer and my lease ends on the TL soon anyways. Watch for a mid year update by Acura to "meet" the standard, They did it with the MDX this year so that the roof strengh test is comparible to the competition.

phil17

having said that, the Accord did fine, lol

jayson888

If you were in a accident then ofcourse the 2 star rating will def be a consideration when you buy a new car. But anyway, I feel plenty safe in my 2012 acura tl. I dont think ill be hitting a brick wall full frontal anytime soon :P

jspagna1

I'm with you jayson, I feel very safe when driving my wife's 2010 TL. Car is like a tank compared to my other vehicles. And with the technology of today,the car is much safer than they were just 10 years ago.

levon1830

Bingo.

sebounet2005

you are wrong, why a4, volvo s60 etc... have kept their stars ?

Eli

What I'd like to know is why a dirt cheap Chevy Cruze has 10 airbags, while a $40k car only has 6?

VtectiveTL

Good point. I remember when the new horsepower ratings were introduced years back. Hondas and Acuras both seen huge drops in specified horsepower. I think the 3rd gen TL went from 270hp to 258hp.

levon1830

Needless to say anything I mention regarding this is pure speculation, but maybe those particular cars were overall safer than the TL from the beginning. Just because 2 different cars both received 5 stars doesn't mean they were created equally with regards to safety.

I liken it to this: imagine 2 students take a history test and they both receive a grade of 100. Even though both students got the same perfect score, that doesn't mean their overall knowledge on the subject was the same.

But I also don't necessarily think that makes the TL an unsafe vehicle. However, I can't really say for certain without researching the differences between the old testing protocol and the new to make a more educated guess about the reasons for the drop in the ratings.

Eli

IIHS gave it all "good" ratings (the highest) and their testing is usually considered more rigorous and real-world than the NHTSA's.

sebounet2005

So why those results ?

winstrolvtec

Great question, if I had to guess I would say they probably focus on a slightly different set of parameters mainly, then the usual reliability factor of the test considering they probably don't get to have 20 cracks at it and present to us the average of all the results but it would be nice to know the actual reasons instead of having to guess.

I am begining to think these test might be going down the road of EPA gas mileages. Doing enough necessary to acheive a good score for a given set of parameters but might yield different real world results when facing many more variables, factors and conditions.

The worst part is that we probably won't know unless we get into as significant an accident and even then, we still see the same cars fall apart and people get hurt in minor fender benders while other folks walk out of that same car without a stratch and not much more vehicular damage in what is easily a more signifcant accident.

sebounet2005

IIHS say for TL built after sept 2011, may be NHTSA destroy a TL made before ?

But i still don't know what's the difference between before and after sept 2011.

My guess is for the roof strength

ncelk

How come the accord did well with the new standard, but the TL went down. The accord is one year older than the TL design. Looks like this is a problem for Acura, and for me. The TL is now off my shopping list this year.

BEAR-AvHistory

With weight being critical to MPG why would they not build to a specific point in the safety spec? The industry advertising is about the spec not the real world.

Litt

my guess . . . acrura fixes this next year.

macguitar

Is no one else still upset or concerned about this? We bought model year 2012 vehicles that tested with some of the worst results. Granted, we don't have enough info (was the test flawed? was there a mistake? is the test unrealistic, etc.) but knowing my $45K automobile isn't at the top of the safety chain is disappointing. Also, how will this affect resale value, say, 4-5 years later when even more cars come out with a higher safety rating? And what if the test is valid and a passenger has a high risk of getting hurt in a frontal crash?

I'm actually surprised no blogs or magazines have picked up on this. It seems like this is a pretty significant failing in a recently-refreshed 2012 automobile.

Granted, I'm no expert on this, but when I see other much-less-expensive cars scoring much higher than the TL, I'm frustrated. I don't know if I should sell my car back to the dealer and take the hit now (rather than potentially have resale value tank) and also go buy another safer car.

Anyone else still frustrated and disappointed by this and wondering what recourse, if any, we have? Acura/Honda has always been a brand that stands for the highest safety and I'm certain they didn't expect this either. But, I bought my car before the test with expectations of the highest ratings. They failed to deliver a product with the highest safety test ratings and surely we can't be expected to just accept that and hope we don't get into a crash or hope our resale values don't drop. Right?

Litt

My 2011 has a 5 star crash rating. I guess i am safe but you in your 2012 are not.

levon1830

It's not like Acura paid someone to sneak into your garage at night and steal airbags/crumple zone reinforcement/etc. out of your 2012 TL. Your car is still the same car that it was under the old testing protocol when it received high scores. You're worrying yourself to death for no reason.

But then again, if you're already this upset about it, maybe you will sleep better at night if you sell your car ASAP. Or file a class action suit against Acura. Or do both. Or do neither.

FYI: that dark thing on the ground behind you is your shadow. Don't be afraid.








Ignore my sarcasm. I'm just messing with you (kinda).

winstrolvtec

Besides that, NHTSA goes on to state that only results of vehicles within the same size segment and within 250 lbs should be compared side by side. FWIW, the 2010 TL had 5 stars across the board according to the NHTSA.

As for as I am concerned, the TL has been a top pick according to the IIHS on four consecutive model years, which includes the very recent 2012. I wouldn't worry about it.

dave1

I wish I could agree that the TL is inherently safe, but unfortunately I do not. The front passenger impact zone falls from a 5 to a 2 in the revised (supposedly more accurate) test. A 2 is the equivalent of a "D" and equates to a very substantial risk of injury in this kind of collision. No other car that I saw with revised testing fell this far and I believe reveals either an engineering failure or a failure of the airbags. While I like to believe a front collision is unlikely, with 50% of the vehicles on the road SUV's, if this area is hit it is likely to result in an accident with a heavier car, and catastrophe for the passenger. I personally have a family and the single biggest criteria in my choice of a tl was the historical reputation of safety. We should all be concerned both about Acura's silence as well this blatant failure. It affects all 4g models. I keep hoping an airbag recall will crop up like happened with some other honda vehicles and solve this problem for us.

macguitar

This is exactly what my main problem with this situation. No explanation or feedback from Acura (who I know cares about safety) only makes things worse.

winstrolvtec

^It likely has little to do with the car and more to do with the testing procedure. It's like the EPA and SAE revisions of recent years. Gas mileage didn't go down nor did HP, that part didn't chnage, the way it is calculated did and now just reflects lower numbers in most cases. I think you are looking at it incorrectly.

That doesn't make the TL unsafe, it's just that there are safer cars according to the NHTSA and how they test and rank. Remember, the way it's conducted you can't compare outside of size segment and it has to be within 250 lbs anyway.

I see what you are saying but this one outcome is not going to make me throw out what the IIHS has to say about the TL being a top safety pick. You shouldn't just ignore that because of this. Worst case average them out and you still have a better than average car in terms of sefety. Just like you don't put all of your eggs in one basket, don't put all of your faith on how safe the car is into only one set of results.

jmps

Very well said winstrolvtec. My wife is buying a TL this week so I have been looking at safety of the TL. One thing I noticed is that the IIHS says their rating is for 2012s built AFTER Sept. 2011. The NHTSA test took place on Dec 7, 2011 so that is very likely the case.

This issue is a real concern though for us. Relative to the A4 and Passat that she also was considering the TL is rated by NHTSA as much less safe within their class. The TL is actually the only two star frontal car in the whole test. It is frustrating to see the Accord being five star ranked.

Since we have decided to go ahead with the purchase we decided that we will go with the IIHS results. We almost decided not to buy though and I think others will come to that conclusion.

On another note, I think the gas mileage of the SH-AWD is also hurting sales here in the Chicago area. There are MANY on the lot. Actually, many TLs in general.

winstrolvtec

^ I think you are making a good choice but the thing is there is no real scale to look at these things evenly. Consideration has to be given to the different sizes and for example, I am not so sure you should even be comparing a TL to a Passat.

The TL FWD base is over 250 lbs heavier than a comparable Passat SEL V6. Even so, they likely tested a base 4 because the test weight was 3203 lbs. They give you no real specifics as to what trim it was, if it had a moonroof, if it was a 4 or 6 cylinder, you have to infer and these things make a difference.

The TL shows a 4,002 lbs SH advance model for both the FWD and AWD. So you have to suspect if they know what they are talking about. The same thing for the A4 listed at 3681 lbs for both the FWD and AWD. Based on the specific test vehicles, you should not even compare them directly. The Accord shows a 3265 model for both the I4 and V6. I assume the test results were for the base 4 cyl, it makes a difference, especially because of the weight. You really have to dissect this stuff to get a better idea or even tell the true story in the first place.

The only effective comparison to base the TL on, according to what the NHTSA has posted up on their site, is the 4002 lbs AWD advance. That leaves comparisons with an M37 AWD, 535ix, and, many others that have not been fully tested yet, like the G37 AWD, Audi A6, E350 AWD, GS 350, etc. Loads of other cars have also not even been fully tested for 2012 either. I expect many scores to come down if not scrample in attempt to make last minute adjustments.

jmps

Yeah, I did note that the test material itself is for the AWD for both FWD and AWD. That doesn't make sense. It does look like the passenger was the culprit in the low rating. Something weird is going on. Perhaps the air bag or something in that one test.

eez4life

I can't believe that old grill gave so much protection.

Buffa

So like a lot of people are wondering, what did they change in Sept 2011 that made it so much safer? Maybe it's the roof? See this link on iihs.org: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=436

I don't think this info was available when this post was first made because I couldn't figure it out, but they must have added something in the roof, because notice that all the other tests on this summary page don't mention "ones built after Sept 2011" except the roof strength.

George Knighton

Unfortunately, the new smaller grille was not big enough for the navigational deflector.

Cars Examiner

Update for everyone: As of April 18 for FWD TLs and April 20 with AWD, the TL now earns three stars instead of two for front-passenger front-impact protection, which bumps the overall score to four stars out of five.

http://www.examiner.com/article/acur...y-also-improve

http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shop...vehicleId=6756

kc1953

You all have forgotten one major change between 2010 and 2012, and I think this accounts for all of the difference in frontal crash test scores. The front grille. The 2012 front grille is much smaller. Now aren't all of you sorry you complained about the nose of the 2009-2011 TL so much. Apparently it served a purpose!

pimpin-tl

Looks to me like it got better from that 09-11 style. They may have improved some stuff under the sheet metal when updating the car to help with the crash tests.

Edward'TLS

Definitely, the 2009's "Power Plenum" will emit a force field to minimize damage, just like the one on the Starship Enterprise.

smolenski

This car is a top safety pick from IIHS(which I trust more than the govt.). It scores higher than the Lexus, Infinity and Saabs. If you are "worried" or "upset", don't buy one or sell the one you own. It's as easy as that.

digiwill

In the world of medicine ( I work in the ER) we like to call the KIA " killed in action" anecdotally, patients involved in major accident who were driving a KIA don't fare too well....despite the crash rating

draph

My 1970 Corvette owners manual describes how to prepare for a frontal impact when you know one is imminent. You're supposed to put your your arms crossed over the top of the wheel and lay your head down while trying to maintain the best control you can up to the point of impact. I wonder how that would fare with the new 2012 standards.

The point is, we've come a long way in safety. Unfortunately, safety is now as much a marketing feature as it is a regulatory hurdle. Also, the insurance industry has been hyping it up because the actuaries and statisticians have pretty much shown big, slow, heavy tanks have lower claims. The result is we now have a society of safety obsessed people who want passive safety design to account for a nanny-state society that allows any moron with no sense of responsibility to share our roads. That's put us on a collision course to having no cars that are fun to drive with CAFE requirements going up at the same time safety standards are getting tougher. By 2025, our cars will weigh 10 tons and do 0-60 in two and a half minutes, but they'll be able to do an offset frontal impact at 85 mph and land on their roofs from the top of a 10 story parking garage without crushing the roof more than 1.735 inches (1.736 will decrement 1 star).

Thanks to all the safety gear, we now have even worse drivers who feel more comfortable taking bigger chances with aggressive maneuvers and the judgments they make like when it's safe to pull out into traffic, gun it across a busy highway, or when to pull out to pass on a two-laned road ("my car's got 10 stars and DRLs, I'm goin' for it").

Anyway, I'm keeping my 2010 TL, which has the same ACE body structure as the 2012 Accord. I'm a mechanical engineer who has dealt with many structural designers in the DoD involving aircraft structures. I know the difference in the front clips hanging off essentially the same body architecture between the TL and the Accord is not going to make a whole lot of difference. With only 1 data point for each vehicle, it's equally likely the 2012 Accord is anomalously good, or the TL is anomalously bad in those new tests.

The_Tripzter

Well, for those who were concerned about their safety in a TL, a new test by the IIHS rated 2 out of 11 luxury cars as good. Can you guess one of them?

Click Here for Article

tvgaman

:gheywave:Long Live TL!