If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Consumer Reports: Saturn
|
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Consumer Reports: Saturn
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Consumer Reports: Saturn
SMS wrote: > For crash tests, the IIHS frontal offset test is a better test than the > NHTSA frontal impact test, so no loss there. Unless, of course, you are in a full frontal impact, which is about as common or more (depending on the study) than a frontal offset crash. In such a crash, the potential loss would be to someone who unwisely overlooked the complementary NHTSA ratings. According to the IIHS: "Full-width and offset tests complement each other. Crashing the full width of a vehicle into a rigid barrier maximizes energy absorption so that the integrity of the occupant compartment, or safety cage, can be maintained well in all but very high-speed crashes. Full-width rigid-barrier tests produce high occupant compartment decelerations, so they're especially demanding of restraint systems. In offset tests, only one side of a vehicle's front end, not the full width, hits the barrier so that a smaller area of the structure must manage the crash energy. This means the front end on the struck side crushes more than in a full-width test, and intrusion into the occupant compartment is more likely. The bottom line is that full-width tests are especially demanding of restraints but less demanding of structure, while the reverse is true in offsets. " Fortunately, most vehicles do pretty well in both the IIHS and NHTSA frontal crash tests these days. It's about time for both of them to increase the speed of their testing to differentiate vehicles a little more. > Interesting to see that the new Civic is the only small car that is top > rated in all categories by IIHS. Also interesting that the Jetta is now > considered a mid-size, along with the Passat. > > So there is now ONE small car on the market that is top-rated for > safety, gets at least 40 MPG, and, if history is any indication, will be > very reliable. Guess Honda won't be doing much discounting on the Civic > anymore. I'm surprised stability control wasn't at least an option on the new Civic. I suppose they are saving it for a mid-cycle introduction. Assuming good NHTSA crash test results, the Civic appears to the best choice in class for safety, though the Corolla is also worth consideration. Caviller www.car-safety.org |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Consumer Reports: Saturn
Well, back in the day CR highly recommended the 1976 Dodge Aspen. My Father
bought one on their report. The rest is history. For those too young to know what an Aspen is, do a google and you will find that it was the biggest pile of crappo built on four wheels. Also, later they said that the mid 1980s Impala/Caprice was a great "handling car whereas the BMW 320i had tricky hanling. They should stick to toasters."fish" > wrote in message news:XTfif.2134$tg3.142@trnddc02... > None of the Saturn cars for the 2006 New Car Preview edition of Consumer > Reports have been recommended. > > Saturn: A different kind of company. > > -- > ______________ > =====fish===== > > |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Saturn horror stories- could (will) happen to you! | [email protected] | Saturn | 3 | June 22nd 05 12:49 AM |
Why all the cracked heads, oil burning,etc. here? | [email protected] | Saturn | 11 | March 28th 05 09:39 PM |
Consumer Reports: "Disappointing ION"... | Warren | Saturn | 72 | June 26th 04 12:15 AM |
What's So Bad About Consumer Reports? | RobertG1 | General | 2 | March 8th 04 06:31 AM |
Saturn Lemons- epidemic flaws, engine cracks, ball joints | misterfact | Antique cars | 0 | January 6th 04 06:04 PM |