Small overlap crash tests: Various cars

"EL_ULY" (uly) 11/17/2015 at 12:49 • Filed to: crash test

2

51

First up, the 2016 BMW 3 series Result: Marginal (orange) Not good

Next up, 2016 Honda HR-V.

Result: Acceptable (yellow)

Next, the 2015 hey hey hey, yeah yeah yeah, la la la The 2015 Jeep Renegade!

Result:Acceptable (yellow)

Next, 2016 Cadillac CTS

Result: Marginal (orange) Not good

Next, 2016 Acura TLX

Result: Marginal (orange) Not good. That is a big surprise considering their current ad campaign promoting a safe fleet.

TheHondaBro > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 12:57

1

The TLX looked a lot better than the HRV, that’s for sure.

EL_ULY > TheHondaBro 11/17/2015 at 12:59

0

I thought it would of got a Good rating because of how it looked but there is probably some G-force sensors that show otherwise.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:01

0

It appears taller vehicles ARE safer.

TheHondaBro > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:04

0

I wanna talk about the Jeep Renegade though. The dummy’s face almost missed the airbag! How is that an acceptable rating?

Bullitt Ride > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:05

0

The BMW did not look marginal compared to the Jeep and Honda... look at the BMW’s A pillar, it didn’t appear to buckle much at all... you could probably still open the driver’s door after that impact on the BMW... can’t say the same about the other cars.

Boxer_4 > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:07

3

Anyone need a windshield washer filler neck?

DrScientist > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:07

0

i’m no physicist nor a materials engineer, but one of the things i see consistently through all of these videos is the wheel maintaining its integrity and being smashed into (or at least toward) the cockpit. i imagine this could cause some serious leg injuries.

is there any other material that would be as strong as necessary for normal driving (including pothole smashing) but would shatter upon the impact of an accident?

i also imagine smaller sidewall tires, and increasing wheel diameters aren’t helping this.

TheHondaBro > DrScientist 11/17/2015 at 13:13

0

Not only that, but the possibility of the wheel moving away from the drivers face, causing him to miss the airbag completely. A good system will divert the energy from the impact around the cabin and release it far from the occupants. Many two-seaters are designed to split in the middle in the event of a high-impact crash in an effort to release the impact energy safely.

Ash78, voting early and often > DrScientist 11/17/2015 at 13:14

1

I would think that if suspensions were designed to break with a certain directional force (that would only occur during a collision) would solve the problem. I’m also thinking about the Volvo mega-pothole tests where the wheel itself broke. If you could engineer the tolerances for the metal to disintegrate with a certain load, that seems like it would also help a lot.

wiffleballtony > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:23

1

Pro tip: avoid driving into walls. If are going to drive into a wall, do it head on.

wiffleballtony > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:26

0

Probably sensed this G

DrScientist > TheHondaBro 11/17/2015 at 13:38

0

i was thinking about the actual wheel, not the steering wheel. but seeing as how the wheels and steering wheel are clearly connected this could also be improved. i do see the dummies hitting the airbag far off center.

DrScientist > Ash78, voting early and often 11/17/2015 at 13:40

0

right. even having the wheel/tire fall parallel to the ground would improve the likelihood it goes under the car rather than through the car.

this sounds expensive though!

whaden > Bullitt Ride 11/17/2015 at 13:40

1

I was thinking the same. the only difference I could find would be how the wheel folded up into the firewall. Probably foot injury.(?) Otherwise, it looked like it held up great. (not like the Caddy that compressed at the truck..yikes)

Teleph0nes > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:42

0

It seems that a lot of the small-overlap rating seems to do with where the wheel/suspension end up. It looks like a lot of cars that don’t do well have the wheel crumbling back and up into the fender where it probably crumbles into the footwell or something. So maybe the CUVs, with the taller ride height/larger fenders have more room to push the wheel out and away from the passenger compartment instead of into it.

Teleph0nes > Bullitt Ride 11/17/2015 at 13:43

1

But the wheel on the BMW ends up crushed under the car, most likely causing damage to the passenger footwell that could result in injury.

Boxer_4 > DrScientist 11/17/2015 at 13:53

1

You most likely wouldn’t even need to use another material. Most alloy wheels are an alloy of aluminum and magnesium. The mechanical properties of any alloy (such as impact resistance) depend on the percentage of each metal used in the alloy. Alloy wheels most likely contain other metals to enhance certain properties of the alloy, but in much smaller percentages (usually ~5% or less). Heat treatments applied to the wheel, and even certain protective coatings applied during manufacturing, also affect the mechanical properties of the alloy. I don’t know what the typical metallurgical composition of a standard alloy wheel is, but I imagine automakers give at least some thought to the issue of wheel integrity and crash testing.

As you point out, there needs to be a balance between impact resistance (pot holes) and impact protection. You will have a lot of unhappy customers (and a liability issue) if their wheels shatter from hitting a pot hole, probably more than if their wheel deformed the wheel well into the cabin during an impact. There is also the consideration of cost, but I don’t know enough in the area of aluminum and magnesium alloys to know which compositions would be more expensive.

The best example I can find of this is the 2014+ Forester’s (SJ) test, where the wheel does in fact shatter. It appears that the wheel never made it past the firewall/bulkhead in one piece. I have no idea what the composition of that wheel is, but I do know that we have a ‘15 SJ in the family, and haven’t had an issue with pot holes.

The other Subaru models with alloy wheels subjected to this test act similarly, but not quite to the extent of the Forester.

m-b-w loves his SUBAROO > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 13:54

0

What's weird is that the 2015 TLX scored Acceptable, so somehow while trying to make it safer, Acura instead made it less safe.

PS9 > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 14:00

2

Get your shit together BMW and caddy. Both of those can be optioned to $50k and beyond. They’re not allowed to be worse than some rubbish badge’d soccer mom mobiles at ANYTHING.

Mercedes Streeter > DrScientist 11/17/2015 at 14:11

0

The smart fortwo (and some other cars) use alloy wheels that absorb energy and break when the forces become too much. The only time you’ll see a smart with its wheel trying to penetrate the cabin is when the car is equipped with steelies or custom wheels.

EL_ULY > PS9 11/17/2015 at 14:18

0

Yeah exactly. At that price level, there are less excuses.

EL_ULY > m-b-w loves his SUBAROO 11/17/2015 at 14:18

0

Lol right? How does that work?

BREADwagon > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 14:20

0

From best to worst for head injury (lower is better):

Acura TLX: 113

Jeep Renegade: 115

Caddilac CTS: 183

Honda HR-V: 185

BMW 3series: 276

None had any head contact. The 3 series had the worst lower compartment (floor pan, foot rest etc) deformation (most intrusion), while the best upper compartment (Steering column, A-pillar etc) out of all of them (least intrusion). The renegade had the best lower compartment deformation (least intrusion).

For some reason, the Renagade had about 50% more chest compression than the others (34mm vs ~20mm for the others), but had the best lower body numbers.

Interestingly, all cars except the CTS had practically zero percent knee-thigh-hip injury, but the CTS had 14%!

Out of the random choices here, the Renegade seems to be the best for THIS test. The only issue is the relatively large movement of the steering column.

It’s surprising how bad the 3series did compared to the others; it’s high tibia and foot numbers and high lower compartment intrusions. Not what I would have thought.

Of course this is only one test, so granted you should take the whole shot of the different tests to figure out the overall safety.

EL_ULY > Bullitt Ride 11/17/2015 at 14:20

0

Must be the impact data recorded by the instruments

EL_ULY > wiffleballtony 11/17/2015 at 14:21

0

G overload !!!

m-b-w loves his SUBAROO > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 14:22

0

According to the report on the crash test, Acura strengthened a piller. My guess is that that weakened another one.

EL_ULY > wiffleballtony 11/17/2015 at 14:22

0

Yeah exactly lol. Still though, cars try to swerve at the last second so this test really makes sense.

JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 14:22

2

And then you have things like the XC90 which just bounce off the wall!

EL_ULY > Boxer_4 11/17/2015 at 14:23

0

LOL OMG good catch!!!!!!!

EL_ULY > TheHondaBro 11/17/2015 at 14:24

0

I was thinking the same. I tend to look for that on these tests.

EL_ULY > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 11/17/2015 at 14:24

1

Passive.... perhaps

EL_ULY > JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! 11/17/2015 at 14:26

0

Lol that’s true. What a beast!

EL_ULY > m-b-w loves his SUBAROO 11/17/2015 at 14:27

0

Possible. All that effects production costs

Rico > DrScientist 11/17/2015 at 14:55

0

I feel as if the airbags are probably designed to not hit you dead center. A deflecting hit would be enough to absorb the force of you flying forward but not also hit you with a ton of force dead on.

DrScientist > Boxer_4 11/17/2015 at 14:57

0

wow. look at that.

thanks!

JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 15:05

0

And it just won Motor Trends suv of the year!

Boxer_4 > DrScientist 11/17/2015 at 15:19

0

I recall noticing the wheel on the Forester when those test results were first released, but I never gave it a second thought until you said something.

Sam > EL_ULY 11/17/2015 at 15:31

1

Aaaaand then there’s the XC90, which aced every single test with Good (Green), and overall Superior.

It scored an Average on Child Restraints, but I'm sure they've already remedied that on the more recent production models.

EL_ULY > Sam 11/17/2015 at 15:43

0

That thing is a beast! I haven’t read about any seat belt updates here at work but it wouldn’t surprise me. They do that all the time

EL_ULY > JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! 11/17/2015 at 15:43

0

Oh ree ree? Niiice!

EL_ULY > BREADwagon 11/17/2015 at 15:48

0

Wow thanks for that information buddy!

BringBackTheCommodore > JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! 11/19/2015 at 15:37

0

The XC90 is the Chuck Norris of cars.

BringBackTheCommodore > EL_ULY 11/19/2015 at 16:09

0

This one kind of caught me offgaurd. Tsk tsk Murano.

Minivans are safer! Toyotas are the safest!

Well... well... well... Chrysler has a great track record!

I bet you the Nissan will nail it!

Yeah, it nailed it. Or got nailed, more correctly. Even the gas door popped open.

The 2015 F-150 is a damned M1 Abrams...

...maybe not.

What if it’s a crew cab model?

Guess not.

The Wrangler did pretty decently though:

EL_ULY > BringBackTheCommodore 11/19/2015 at 16:13

1

Previous couple of F-150 (1997-2003) were horrid in these tests. Most vans did pretty bad during the string of testing. Subscribe to the IIHS’s channel, they post often

BringBackTheCommodore > EL_ULY 11/19/2015 at 16:17

0

Those collapsed in the tests. So did the Ram. The Chevy and GMC trucks were decent, barely. Good point.

EL_ULY > BringBackTheCommodore 11/19/2015 at 16:23

0

So many people buy their kids older truck because “it’s bigger so it’s safer”

BringBackTheCommodore > EL_ULY 11/20/2015 at 12:25

0

Amazing how the truth is so vastly different than reality.

EL_ULY > BringBackTheCommodore 11/20/2015 at 12:47

0

indeed. And that is all passive. The braking distances are worse and lack any agility in trying to avoid the accident all together.

BringBackTheCommodore > EL_ULY 11/20/2015 at 12:50

0

I dunno, the ABS on my F-350 has worked quite well, on dry pavement, wet pavement, and even on ice (I wish I hadn’t needed it in those situations, but I’m glad it worked). Probably has more to do with 6 tires and a beefy braking system than anything else, though.

Overall, I can agree, especially when you go back to the ‘60s, ‘70s, and ‘80s year models.

EL_ULY > BringBackTheCommodore 11/20/2015 at 12:53

0

F-250/350 have good brakes because Super Duty. Hand me down F150’s tho... especially older and aging models

BringBackTheCommodore > EL_ULY 11/20/2015 at 12:58

0

I can agree with you, definitely! My 2005 F-350 stops great, the ‘86 F-250 I had, yikes! Same for the ‘80 Chevy C10 stepside.