cusdaddy

Here is the entire article:

Interesting notes: They tested the G35 Sedan. Not the G35 Coupe. Results may be different for the Coupe as both cars have totally different rear-ends.

The Mercedes E-Class also performed poorly.

In addition, the Acura TL (no CL tests on record) scored Marginal with damage of $1,070. Not significantly better than the G35 IMO ($1480 damage)

http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_rat...eed_midmod.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------
DETROIT — Three of six new or redesigned vehicles fared poorly in the latest bumper-crash tests conducted by the insurance industry, and two others performed marginally.

Only one of the vehicles, the 2003 Mazda Mazda6, had an “acceptable” rating based on damage costs, according to results released Monday from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research group funded by insurance providers.

The midsize 2003 Infiniti G35, 2004 Nissan Quest minivan and large Mercedes-Benz E-Class earned poor ratings for bumper performance, while the midsize 2003 Saab 9-3 and 2004 Toyota Sienna minivan received marginal scores.

The Arlington, Va.-based insurance institute, which conducts regular tests of new or newly redesigned vehicles, measured how the vehicles’ bumpers performed in low-speed crashes common in commuter traffic or parking lots. The tests were conducted at 5 mph and included impacts with flat barriers and poles.

Vehicles are rated good, acceptable, marginal or poor, based on the cost of repairs.

Average damage per test ranged from about $340 on the Mazda Mazda6 to $1,480 on the Infiniti G35.

“The G35’s bumpers are a disaster,” said Adrian Lund, the institute’s chief operating officer. “Infiniti engineers attached an additional metal plate to the center of the rear bumper reinforcement bar to improve the car’s performance in the pole test, but it didn’t make much difference. There was extensive damage to body panels.”

The Quest sustained far more damage than its predecessor model, which the institute tested in 1999, dropping it from a rating of good to poor. The Saab 9-3 and Sienna also performed somewhat worse than earlier designs.

In a statement, Nissan — whose products include the Quest and G35 — said it believes the two models perform competitively among other vehicles in terms of repair costs.

“Obviously, the cost to repair bumpers is only one component,” the automaker said. “These tests . . . are conducted to determine cost estimates to repair damage incurred in low-speed bumper impact tests and are not related to safety.”

Nissan also noted that the G35 was named Motor Trend magazine’s 2003 car of the year.

Average damage per test on the Mercedes-Benz E-Class was $1,300, second worst among the six vehicles. The car sustained nearly $3,000 in damage when it struck a pole in the rear at 5 mph because the bumper failed to protect the vehicle’s fenders and trunk lid, the institute said.

Mercedes-Benz spokeswoman Michelle Murad said the tests are not safety related, and that accident scenarios are infinitely variable.

“No one test will ever accurately portray the full capability of our vehicle,” Murad said.

soopa

thank you cusdaddy... proving my point again and again "There was extensive damage to body panels"


im not thrasing the G35... i like the G35... i think overall it is a better car than the cl and a better bang for the buck. i would own one if i was buying a car in that price range right now.

the only thing i dont like is the interior.... which is inferior to everything in its segment and much below it.

and the succeptability to high repair bills which i could see in the car from the beginning...

soopa

you mixed up your numbers there.... the G35 had $1,988 worth of damage. nearly 1000 more...

cusdaddy

I read into it more and the E-Class had $3k of damage from that same test.. OUCH!!!!

cusdaddy

You are right. I stand corrected. $2k is a large amount of $$

soopa

ya that trunklid being hit on the E fucked it.

i cant believe the a4 did so well...

heyitsme

Geez, were people waiting to find something else wrong with the g35? cutting costs, is benz cutting cost too or was that car excluded from goshens plan? think its more like poor design for crash impact, if anyone followed the car from introduction in japan they'd remember the controversy over what they had to do to the bumper when they brought it to the us, put a nice ugly lip on, kinda an extension-an afterthought to a car designed in japan to make it crash better in the us. the coupe on the other hand was introduced here first and then sent to japan so its up in the air whether that car would have a similiar problem, can't be determined by looking at how panels line up, its whats under the bumper cover that absorbs the energy.

soopa

i dont think its cost cutting at all. i didnt say that....