They have their benefits, among them affordability and fuel efficiency, but when it comes to how they stand up in crash tests, small cars don't fare very well in crashes with larger vehicles.
The U.S. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety looked at 2009 versions of the Smart "fortwo," the Honda Fit, and the Toyota Yaris, and found that drivers in those vehicles could sustain significant leg and head injuries in front-end crashes with mid-size vehicles.
Automakers argued that the tests simulated high-speed crashes rarely seen on the roads.
When gas prices surged in 2008, sales of small cars jumped as well. Not only do they cost less - on average US$12,000 to $18,000 - they're also good on gas.
The tests involved head-on crashes between the "fortwo" and the 2009 Mercedes C Class, the Fit and a 2009 Honda Accord, and the Yaris and the 2009 Toyota Camry.
In the fortwo crash, the Smart car went airborne after striking the C Class, which weigs about twice as much. The fortwo's interior was badly damaged and the driver could have faced serious leg and head injuries. The C Class didn't sustain much damage.
A Smart USA spokesperson noted that the test simulated a "rare and extreme scenario" and the fortwo has in the past received strong ratings from the U.S. government's crash test program.
The test involving the Honda Fit saw the dummy's head strike the steering wheel through the air bag. Once again the Fit's structure didn't stand up as well against that of the Accord. Honda reps said more or less the same thing as Smart USA - that the test represented extreme conditions and that all 2009 Hondas had received top scores from the Insurance Institute.
The Yaris test was more of the same - in the crash with the larger Camry, the smaller car sustained more damage and the driver dummy showed signs of head and leg injuries. A Toyota spokesperson said the car-to-car crash didn't have much relevance to consumers because of the severity.
The U.S. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety looked at 2009 versions of the Smart "fortwo," the Honda Fit, and the Toyota Yaris, and found that drivers in those vehicles could sustain significant leg and head injuries in front-end crashes with mid-size vehicles.
Automakers argued that the tests simulated high-speed crashes rarely seen on the roads.
When gas prices surged in 2008, sales of small cars jumped as well. Not only do they cost less - on average US$12,000 to $18,000 - they're also good on gas.
The tests involved head-on crashes between the "fortwo" and the 2009 Mercedes C Class, the Fit and a 2009 Honda Accord, and the Yaris and the 2009 Toyota Camry.
In the fortwo crash, the Smart car went airborne after striking the C Class, which weigs about twice as much. The fortwo's interior was badly damaged and the driver could have faced serious leg and head injuries. The C Class didn't sustain much damage.
A Smart USA spokesperson noted that the test simulated a "rare and extreme scenario" and the fortwo has in the past received strong ratings from the U.S. government's crash test program.
The test involving the Honda Fit saw the dummy's head strike the steering wheel through the air bag. Once again the Fit's structure didn't stand up as well against that of the Accord. Honda reps said more or less the same thing as Smart USA - that the test represented extreme conditions and that all 2009 Hondas had received top scores from the Insurance Institute.
The Yaris test was more of the same - in the crash with the larger Camry, the smaller car sustained more damage and the driver dummy showed signs of head and leg injuries. A Toyota spokesperson said the car-to-car crash didn't have much relevance to consumers because of the severity.
Tell that to this guy!
It's come to my attention that the car above is not a "Smart", but a Volkswagen "Fox". They both have similar features. So I'm sorry about that... BUT...They both have very similar crash test outcomes also... So take it what ya may.
Take a look at the top and see it get it's face filled in by a "C Class" Mercedes Benz! Does that make ya feel better?
Wally Logic:
As for the European And Asian Automakers saying accidents don't normally happen like that. "Only extreme conditions"! We live in North America. It's a very vast area. Most people I know drive 200km a day, on super fast highways. Every day is an extreme day! Maybe if we lived across the road to go to work and walked down the street to shop? Then these cars could be practical? They're not in our countries. EVER!
I garnetee insurance will go up on smaller cars even more than before after these results are published . So goodbye to your savings!!! Shit these cars don't even save that much on gas! Look at the real stats on these cars and you'd be surprised on the saving. 2 to 10 mpg average savings. Is 10 mpg worth your life? Plus da "Smart" uses diesel the most caustic, cancer causing, fuel in da world!
We don't need smaller cars. We need to change the resources we use in our favour.
40 mph get'cha's a wheel chair! At Best!
Enuf said.
Go'n on holiday fer a few weeks. Hope everyone has a great spring. I'm go'n surf'n!
Sa Later Wallycrawler.
4 Don't Just Sit There Say Sumthin !:
Have an awesome holiday. Ah, to get away! Enjoy for me too, okay? *smooches*
Yikes! Nothing brings it home like a real life picture.
That isn't a Smart in that crash photo. No Smart has a rear spare, nor a tailgate like that. It appears to be a kia perhaps.
Talk about stupid.....get your facts straight.
That is obviously not a smart car. Not engineered the same either. Its funny because you're bagging on the smart car in a know it all fashion and yet you cant even tell it from another micro car. What a fool.
Post a Comment