Crash test ratings are in!

Hmm, it's in the compact group.

And if you look at that whole group, there are some listed two ways, with and without Side Air Bags

The Prius listing does not have the w/SAB designator by it.

Wonder if the results are different with.

 

The side I'm interested in 99% of the time did just fine...

 

This is a significant improvement over the Prius Classic's crash ratings.

 

The chest deceleration is reported at 41G for the driver and 48G for the passenger; from the graphs, it looks like the 48G number just pops over the 10% probability of severe injury threshold. That would be the difference between five stars (less than 10%) and four stars (11% - 20%).

 

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/SList2.cfm

Search for 2004 Honda Civic and you'll see that it did matter...

 

I told you the results would be better than the Classic. ;-)

BTW, I have a question in too on whether they plan on testing w/ SAB. It could be these results are it for the 2004 Prius. We'll see.

 

Yeah, I noticed that. I'm wondering if there will be a second set of numbers with the airbags.

Not only from curiosity, but it may have an effect on insurance rates.

 

Is that with Side AirBags?

 

It looks like some cars did better on the side crash tests with SAB. In other cars though, the rating was not changed.

It looks like the 04 Prius tests were not done with the side/head airbags (they don't seem inflated/visible) in the side impact picture.

I was hoping for a few more 5 star ratings, but these results are certinaly pretty good - better than the 4 door Camry.

 

Cybele, I'm assuming so.

Some are rated with the annotation w/SAB

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars/2004Cmpt.html

Check the Civic

2004 Honda Civic 2-DR 5/5/3/4/4

2004 Honda Civic 2-DR w/SAB 5/5/5/5/4

Hopefully they will test the Prius both ways too.

 

The side impact pelvis deceleration delta is even larger ( front and rear). Knowing nothing about this, I'm curious why there is a delta. Why don't the rules of physics treat both front passengers the same for chest deceleration? I imagine the seat design difference front/rear can account for the side impact pelvis deceleration delta.

 

I sent a note to NHTSA asking for a few clarifying details on the crash tests.

Here's the note I sent followed by their response:

SENT:

Dear NHTSA Crash Test folks,

Thanks for your great work. Having recently purchased a 2004 Prius that has all the optional safety features, I had hoped to see this car get all 5s. I'm a little disappointed to see that a new, completely re-engineered car like this should receive ratings that are not much different than other, earlier design, mid-size cars.

Question: Was the 2004 Prius tested on a car that had the optional side and head airbags or was it on a basic car that lacks certain optional safety features?

The 2004 Prius is advertised as having both front and rear, side and head airbags. In your listing of safety features, the, "Side Airbag - Rear" field has no information in it. Is that a mistake on your part or does Prius advertising need to be adjusted a bit?

The Prius literature talks about having two-stage airbags. Is this not considered to be an, "Advanced Airbag Feature"? (that field is also empty).

Thanks for your attention,



RESPONSE:

We do not test vehicles with optional safety equipment unless the manufacturer requests (and funds) an additional test. If you see two of the same vehicles listed for one year with one marked "w/ SAB", you can be assured this was the case. We test with only the bare minimum safety equipment so that we can be assured all persons purchasing that vehicle will be afforded the protection we have tested with.

Though we cannot explicitly comment on how much extra protection these particular airbags would provide, vehicles with side air bags are doing very well in NCAP side impact. Every car with a side air bag for the driver (in a normally seated, fully belted position), has rated 3 Stars or better. The passenger cars that received 5 Stars for the driver, all had side air bags. On the other hand, we have noticed that cars can use the side structure and interior, energy-absorbing padding also to do well in NCAP side impact. Please be aware that side air bags may be harmful to children who are not restrained correctly.

Obviously the advertising fails to mention that you need to pay more for the airbagss i.e., they are optional! And don't be disappointed by the smattering of 4 star ratings for this car. It is very small and it is a little more difficult to score well on these tests in small cars. Our advice is always just to look for a vehicle that received 4 or 5 stars in every category, which this vehicle did.

Dual stage and advanced airbags are not the same thing. Basically, and advanced airbag will detect "who" is sitting in the seat it is about to deploy in and deploy in a way that it attempts to avoid harming passengers such as small females and children. Dual stage simply means that there are two "levels" of airbag, a high and a low. If you are in a low speed crash only the first "level" would inflate so as not to introduce too much extra energy into the crash dynamics. Basically, it is trying not to go "overboard"... there can be such a thing as "too much" in this situation. This will explain in detail the differences:

http://www.nhtsa.gov/airbags/advancedairba...A.htm#questions

Thank you for your continued interest in our program.

NCAP

www.safercar.gov

 

Indeed -- that was just the info I was looking for about the difference between dual stage airbags and the newer advanced bags. If I read things right, sounds as if the Advanced bags will be required in all cars starting in 2006.

Frankly, I'm pretty pleased with the results; given a car that has to be big, light for fuel efficiency, etc., I think this is a pretty good rating.

I'd probably feel a bit safer in a Volvo -- but I wouldn't enjoy the ride as much.

 

efusco wrote:

Just to be kind of nitpicky, the idea of "developing momentum" is a fiction. When you are in a collision with something in front of your car, there is nothing to accelerate you; your momentum is determined by how fast you were travelling at the impact time, and your momentum is only decreased, never increased.

By way of example, consider two identical cars driving towards a brick wall at the same speed and time. Car A has a passenger in the front seat, no seatbelt. Car B has a passenger sitting in the right back seat, no seatbelt and the front passenger seat in front of him is empty and folded down.

When the cars simultaneously strike the brick wall, both identical passengers have the same momentum (mass times velocity). The passenger in car A will be stopped sooner by the airbag in front of him, and will likely suffer fewer injuries than the passenger in car B.

The passenger in car B will likely have his momentum slowed by his legs catching on things, his arms catching on things, etc. When the B passenger hits the front airbag his momentum (mass times velocity) will be lower than that of passenger A, not higher. (Lets assume for this example that the airbag remains inflated long enough that it is there when B gets to it).

Yet passenger B is likely more injured. The reason however is not due to increased momentum, but rather increased travel... as he is flying through the air from the back seat to the front, all kinds of injuries can occur as parts of his body snag on things. If his feet get pinned down while his torso shoots forward you can imagine how disastrous that would be. And he likely won't hit the airbag in front squarely with his torso; his head may crash into it "head on". Or he may crash into the dashboard or above the airbag, and be slowed much more quickly by at impact.

So the point is that safety restraints don't reduce the momentum on impact, but rather they distribute the impact momentum over a wider part of the body and over a longer time period.

Not that really makes any difference; like I say I'm nitpicking


Getting back to the question of why the drivers and passengers results are different, it seems to me that it's just that the car isn't symmetrical. Under the hood there are different pieces of machinery on the right and left, the airbags are different right and left, and the driver has more protruberances like the steering wheel and pedals in front of him. I wouldn't be surprised if they put more safety engineering into the driver's side, perhaps designing the car with the more crushable things on the driver's side and the less crushable things on the passenger's side.[/b][/quote]