The banner above is an advertisment - if it asks you to download software, please ignore.
Site News - 3/26 M Car Covers (by State of Nine) | 12/12 Make Amazon Pay Saabnet!
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:03:07 -0400
From: "Rob Guenther" <robertguenthernospamatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Which one of these cars are the safest, and which one should I get?


I don't know where you are going to get any of those cars for the money you have to spend... at least not around here (Ontario) you would. I'd say the S80 Volvo would be the best car out of that group... As it is large in mass, and has a full set of safety systems... Those 5 star tests have to be taken with a grain of salt too.... If you crash at higher then 35mph it's been seen that Volvo's tend to do really well... Case in point, Volvo 240's don't have 5 star safety ratings from what I have seen, but do phenomenal in bad accidents... Golfs/Jetta's from their A2 era (1985-1992) don't score 5 starts, but are excellent cars in rollovers and in most impacts at higher speeds... And you didn't mention the new Golf/Jetta - they get 5 stars front, side... "The Diesel" <hollywood_onealnospamo.com> wrote in message news:e1df7c64.0406141248.21234724nospaming.google.com... > I wish car manufacturers put roll bars in cars(made to protect from > roof collapse in a rollover and made in such a way as to not hurt the > driver or passengers in a side impact). > I wish car manufacturers would also use 4 point seat belts, and have > fire retardant fire shields around the fuel tank, as well as internal > fuel cell bladders like they have in professional race cars. > > Back to the subject, my budget is at the most $12,000. > These are the cars I'm considering based on the Crash Test Ratings. > > 2001/2002 Honda Civic Coupe with Side Air Bags > > 1999/2000 Volvo S80 > > 2003 Toyota Matrix with Side Air Bags > > 2003 Pontiac Vibe with Side Air Bags > > > These are cars that are really a little out of my range, but I'm still > looking out to see if maybe I'll get lucky and there will be a high > milage car in my price range. > > 2002 Lexus ES300 with Side Air Bags > > 2003 Honda Accord Coupe with Side Air Bags > > 2003 Saab 9-5 with Side Air Bags > > 2002 Acura MDX with Side Air Bags > > There's one more car I wish I had more data about. > It's a high milage 1998 Lexus LS400, I know it does excellent in the > IIHS front offset crash test, and it does have side air bags, but > since there's no data about the side impact crash test or the rollover > resistance, unfortunately I don't think I could get it even if a high > milage one was in my price range. > > I have provied links to the crash test results to many of these cars > throughout the post. > > For me to even CONSIDER a car, it would have at least meet these > standards. > It would need at least 14 out of 15 stars in these 3 parts of the > crash tests. > 1(Front Offset Crash Test Rating for the driver), 2(Side Impact Star > Rating for the Front Seats), and 3(Rollover Resistance). > Also, VERY IMPORTANTLY a car has to have a CENTER fuel tank, and NOT a > rear fuel tank like a Town Car or Mustang or Pinto or Crown Victoria. > > > > > > > > > > Which car do you think is the safest car for that money? > I know that the obvious choice would be a 1999/2000 Volvo S80, but > when you do a lot of research, you realize that the 1999/2000 Volvo > S80 may not be as safe as you think. > First of all the Volvo S80 is a pretty unreliable car from what I've > read, but to me safety is SO important that even reliability and fuel > economy have to take a back seat to safety. > What I'm MOST concerned about ever being in a serious car accident > even more than death, is getting paralyzed or getting burned so badly > that you look like an alien and you look much worse than a Klingon or > a Reptilian Xindi. > I've seen burn victims on tv, that only wish they looked like a > Klingon or Reptilian Xindi instead of what they look like. > I'm really quite concerned about the rollover ratings, because the > other day I saw a show called something like "The Science of Crash > Tests" on The Discovery Science Channel, and they showed how a guy got > paralyzed with his Ford F-150 rolled over in an accident. > Then they actually did a rollover test of a Ford F-150 and also of a > Volvo SUV. > The F-150s roof COMPLETELY collapsed and if there was a person inside, > he/she would have been paralyzed if not dead. > The Volvo SUVs roof pretty much held its shape even after it rolled > over and over again. > That's one of the main reasons which I like the Volvo S80, I have a > feeling that even though the rollover rating for the 1999/2000 Volvo > S80 are not given, that the 1999/2000 Volvo S80 may likely have a 5 > star rollover resistance rating if it were tested. > I also feel that I'm correct in thinking that probably the roof of the > 1999/2000 Volvo S80 has a lot of structural reenforcement to prevent > it from collapsing in a rollover crash. > > I wish I could get the Toyota Matrix, but it looks just so tall and so > narrow, that I almost feel it's very likely to rollover in a side > impact or in a high speed turn. > If the Toyota Matrix was Short and Wide, then it would be the perfect > car for me as it would have a 5 star rollover rating instead of 4 > stars, and it's reliable and has good fuel economy as well, but > because it only has a 4 star rating in the rollover resistance test, > I'm leaning against it. > > > Actually first I thought I'd get a 2001 Honda Civic Coupe with Side > Air Bags since it did pretty well in the crash tests, it had great > reliability, and it had great fuel economy as well, but my dad > basically made it clear that I would not be getting that car even > though I was going to buy it with my own money. > My dad said that since it only weighs 2500lbs, that it's an unsafe car > and the crash tests are all lies and propoganda so that the car > companies can get rich. > BTW, my dad drives a 2000 Lincoln Town Car, which in my opinon is a > LESS safe car than the Honda Civic Coupe with Side Airbags because of > its crash test results and the Lincoln Town Car's higher death rate, > its poor accident avoidance capability, and the FATAL flaw in the > Lincoln Town Car, it's REAR FUEL TANK which could rupture in a high > speed rear accident. > Well after my dad refused to allow me to get the Honda Civic, I > started looking at the 1999/2000 Volvo S80, and at first I was all set > on buying it, but then I realized that it's a very unreliable car and > that it would be in the shop a lot if I bought it. > I did think twice, but then I thought that safety is so important that > I could live with unreliability. > I then however discovered that maybe the 1999/2000 Volvo S80 is NOT as > safe a car as I had thought. > It's true that it did great in the NHTSA Side Impact Crash Tests, but > it was never tested in the Front Offset or Rollover Crash Tests by the > NHTSA so you don't get the whole picture. > 1999 Volvo S80 NHTSA Crash Test > http://www.nospam/NCAP/Cars/804.html > To get the whole picture, I did a lot of research and I found the > results for the IIHS Front Offset Crash test, and the NCAP Crash Tests > for the 2000 Volvo S80. > I was Shocked that the 2000 Volvo S80 didn't do perfect in the IIHS > Front Offset Crash test, as you can see, the 2000 Volvo S80 did pretty > poorly in the Restraints/dummy kinematics category. > 2000 Volvo S80 IIHS Crash Test > http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/00007.htm > > I found it almost mindboggling that Volvos Flagship Sedan(which I > previously thought to be the safest car of the 20th century)basically > got a D in the NCAP Front Offset Crash Test, but it got a B(85%) > overall because it got an A+ in the Side Impact NCAP Crash Test. > 2000 Volvo S80 NCAP Crash TEST > http://www.euroncap.com/content/safety_ratings/details.php?id1=4&id2=55 > Could it be true that a Volvo could produce a car that was so unsafe > in the front offset crash after all the money and research and hard > work they put into producing their flagship model? > > I wish I could afford the 2001 Volvo S80 since that got 5 stars in the > NHTSA Front Offset Crash test, while the 2000 Volvo S80 was untested > for the Front Offset test, but unfortunately the 2001 S80 is out of my > price range. > > > > One of 2 things have to be true, either the 1999/2000 Volvo S80 is a > VERY SAFE CAR and the NCAP are LYING and bias against Volvo, or > 1999/2000 Volvo S80 is perhaps the most overrated car ever in safety. > > There actually is some circumstancial evidence that the NCAP may > actually be bias agaisnt Volvo or something. > I mean look at how the 1998 Volvo S70 does excellent in the NHTSA > Front Offset Crash Test. > 1998 Volvo S70 NHTSA Crash Test > http://www.nospam/NCAP/Cars/671.html > > Shockingly the same car the 1998 Volvo S70 does HORRIBLE(an F)in the > NCAP Front Offset Crash Test. > 1998 Volvo S70 NCAP Crash Test > http://www.euroncap.com/content/safety_ratings/details.php?id1=4&id2=54 > > After looking at all the results, 1 of 3 things must be true. > Either the NHTSA is bias in favor of Volvo, The NCAP is bias against > Volvo, or a North American 1998 Volvo S70 is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT > structurally than a 1998 European Volvo S70. > > > > > > 2003 Pontiac Vibe NHTSA Crash Test > http://www.nospam/NCAP/Cars/2150.html > > > 2003 Toyota Matrix NHTSA Crash Test > http://www.nospam/NCAP/Cars/2149.html > > 2001 Honda Civic Coupe NHTSA Crash Test > http://www.nospam/NCAP/Cars/1689.html > > 1995-2000 Lexus LS400 IIHS Crash Test > http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/96031.htm > > > 2000 Lincoln Town Car NHTSA Crash Test > http://www.nospam/NCAP/Cars/1003.html

Return to Main Index
StateOfNine.com
SaabClub.com
Jak Stoll Performance
M Car Covers
Ad Available

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2024 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Mission & Privacy Notice.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]