4 Star Government Safety Ratings- Will it impact sales?

[CPSDarren]

Originally Posted by kens

For those considering a Prius vs another hybrid, the main question probably should be vehicle size rather than the numerical ratings, because size matters a lot in collisions with other vehicles.

My wife and I recently ordered a FFH largely because it's larger than a Prius.

The Fusion hybrid is an excellent choice for overall safety. If cost and fuel economy were not also a factor, we would have highly considered the Fusion or Camry.

What's really sad about this is that in a perfect world, I'd prefer to drive a small car, but then I came across the IIHS's size study: http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4404.pdf

And with all of the enormous SUVs roaming around both my wife and I felt that we (and especially our 1 year old daughter) would be safer in the Fusion. The worst part of this is that I recognize that buying the larger car, while making us safer, makes other people slightly less safe in the event that we collide with them.

www.informedforlife.org has a nice rating system that factors in crash test results, safety features and weight in a very sensible manner. Using their calculator, the Prius would earn a SCORE of around 69 or so if I entered the data correctly. Their results are not yet updated. Models with missing data are given "typical" results and so their overall SCORE may not be reflective of a final SCORE when they have updated their crash test results.

Originally Posted by RodJo

Sure, but how likely are you to hit another car head-on?

Quite likely, relative to other angles and types of crashes, anyway. For serious crashes with a fatality, frontal and frontal offset impacts with other vehicles are the most common type.

[32kcolors]

Originally Posted by CPSDarren

Quite likely, relative to other angles and types of crashes, anyway. For serious crashes with a fatality, frontal and frontal offset impacts with other vehicles are the most common type.

I'd think side and rear impacts are more common than frontal. Is this not true?

[CPSDarren]

Originally Posted by 32kcolors

I'd think side and rear impacts are more common than frontal. Is this not true?

Not for severe impacts that involve a fatality. It's not even close. Frontal impacts account for about half of the total, roughly split between full width and offset. Rear crashes are under 10% of the total. The remainder are side impacts, rollovers and other modes. Interestingly, side impacts account for the most fatalities to properly restrained passengers...

Data for less severe impacts that do not involve a fatality are not nearly as well documented, but rear-enders tend to be more frequent for fender benders and crashes involving only injuries.

[RodJo]

Originally Posted by 32kcolors

I'd think side and rear impacts are more common than frontal. Is this not true?

Again, I think it depends on where you live and drive. I'm almost 50 and I have never seen a frontal impact between two cars, although they would be far more deadly (although I forgot about pickups rolling over with kids in the back). The only times I have seen or read about them usually involves a drunk late at night. Someone driving into a guardrail, or a tree, or a house, or a Walmart seem more common and can be fatal, even when alcohol is not involved. Rear-end collisions and intersection accidents are probably the most common, although they tend to be at fairly low speeds.

[CPSDarren]

Originally Posted by RodJo

Again, I think it depends on where you live and drive. I'm almost 50 and I have never seen a frontal impact between two cars, although they would be far more deadly (although I forgot about pickups rolling over with kids in the back). The only times I have seen or read about them usually involves a drunk late at night. Someone driving into a guardrail, or a tree, or a house, or a Walmart seem more common and can be fatal, even when alcohol is not involved. Rear-end collisions and intersection accidents are probably the most common, although they tend to be at fairly low speeds.

You can break down the data by state, vehicle type and numerous other variables at FARS Encyclopedia . Use the Query tab to create your own report. I've found the results to be fairly consistent, though. Frontal crashes are the most common type in crashes involving fatalities.

[JimN]

To improve one's survivability in a collision wear a helmet, HANS device & nomax suit.

[RodJo]

Originally Posted by CPSDarren

You can break down the data by state, vehicle type and numerous other variables at FARS Encyclopedia . Use the Query tab to create your own report. I've found the results to be fairly consistent, though. Frontal crashes are the most common type in crashes involving fatalities.

As I expected, it looks like fatal head-on collisons between 2 cars is pretty uncommon where I live.

[CPSDarren]

Originally Posted by RodJo

As I expected, it looks like fatal head-on collisons between 2 cars is pretty uncommon where I live.

Then stability control and handling may be a bigger part of the picture. Crash protection ratings are still a factor if you strike a tree or pole or barrier, though your vehicle weight would be less of a factor in that case.

[CPSDarren]

Originally Posted by CPSDarren

www.informedforlife.org has a nice rating system that factors in crash test results, safety features and weight in a very sensible manner. Using their calculator, the Prius would earn a SCORE of around 69 or so if I entered the data correctly.

I just learned that you have to actually compute the NHTSA frontal risk percentage from the sub category results of chest and head numbers. I had used an average of 15% as a typical 4-star figure, but it turns out the actual numbers really are closer to 5-star ratings.

The author has now updated their FAQ to reflect this, along with the risk calculation that is used. The actual load based figure for the 2010 Prius is 11.48% for the NHTSA frontal risk factor. 10% would be the threshold for 5-stars, 20% for 3-stars. Rounding down (of course!) to 11 for their SCORE calculator, that results in a score of 64. That is quite good overall and barely makes their "Recommended" requirements. Yeah, if I round up it barely misses, so sue me;-)

[Glider]

Originally Posted by anne1965

....The Prius did get 4 stars, but was it 4.9? Other cars got 5 stars, but were those 5.1?

It seems to me that Anne1965 is making a very important point here - and it undersores the problem with having 5 "buckets" for ratings instead of a continuous "ramp". Let's use "*" to represent "star"

Suppose 4* runs from 4.00 - 4.99 and 5* runs from 5.00 -5.99. Now suppose there are three cars:
modelA = 4.99 (= 4* !!)
modelB = 5.00 (= 5* !!)
modelC = 5.99 (= 5* !!)

Many people will prefer B(5*) over A(4*), when there is really NO DIFFERENCE because of measurement error (unless you crash 100 cars of each model and average them). But the same people will think B(5*) and C(5*) are the same when B is definitely LESS SAFE than C.

Wouldn't a decimal number system provide a LOT more information than the star system. I know there are other numbers given, but 90% of the buyers only are only seeing stars.

This is my 1.99 cents worth anyway