SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
There have been several threads about comparing the XC90 with this and that, how the steering wheel on the 3.2 vibrates, how the motors offer less power than a 747,
and how the platform has been around....gasp.....for 10 years.

One thing I NEVER worry about, and that is the fact that I sent my wife out on the street in some cheap alternative that "looked" like it offered the same protection as a XC90
with boron steel reinforced roof and roll cage. There are a lot of poseurs out there..........everyone wants to be like a Volvo........few attain that status (all things considered).

From the Wall Street Wire, May 29, 2012.....................sure would not want to see anyone I cared about leave the driveway in one of these cars. With all the style, utility and
interior ergonomics we get in our Volvo cars, it is easy to overlook the huge safety margin we also get every time we drive one. I have added photos of each model to help identify
what the article is talking about, we see plenty of these on the streets today........so there are a lot of unsuspecting people out there without the best protection.






The Most Dangerous Cars in America

Posted: May 29, 2012 at 6:26 am


1. Ram 1500
> Make: Dodge

> Bad ratings: side-marginal; rollover-marginal
> 2011 sales: 156,983
> Price: $22,120
> JD Power Initial Quality: 2/5

Though Dodge has been offering the half-ton Ram 1500 since 1981, its safety track record has long been unimpressive. From 1998 through 2001, the truck received failing marks from IIHS in frontal offset tests, and was rated “poor” in protecting heads and left legs, as well as in restraining the crash test dummy. Though frontal offset ratings have since received “good” ratings from the IIHS, the vehicle’s side-impact and rollover ratings remain substandard. Curiously, it was the opposite in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration tests. The agency found fault with the Ram’s performance on frontal impact tests but not with side impact tests. Despite safety concerns, the model has been selling well, and from 2007 to 2011 Dodge sold more than 100,000 trucks each year.

2. Colorado Crew Cab
> Make: Chevrolet

> Bad ratings: side-poor; rollover-marginal; rear-marginal
> 2011 sales: 31,026
> Price: $17,475
> JD Power Initial Quality: 3/5

The Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon crew cab are fundamentally the same light truck made by General Motors (NYSE: GM) with differing cosmetic features. The small pickup performed quite poorly in the IIHS tests, earning a “poor” side-impact grade and “marginal” grades for rollover and rear safety. Sales of the Colorado have been especially poor in recent years; GM sold 75,716 such cars in 2007 and only 31,026 in 2011. Making matters worse, a November, 2011, recall of 5,220 Colorados and Canyons due to seat belt safety concerns did not help either the brand’s sales or its safety record.

3. CX-7
> Make: Mazda

> Bad ratings: rollover-marginal; rear-marginal
> 2011 sales: 35,641
> Price: $22,190
> JD Power Initial Quality: 4/5

Although it will be replaced by the newer CX-5 model next year, the CX-7’s safety record certainly will not be remembered fondly. Despite “good” scores in front and side impact ratings, low grades in rollover and rear-impact measures go against perceptions that the CX-7 is a safe car to drive. Sales rose from about 20,000 in 2009 to 35,641 in 2011. Still, this is down from 2007 when 42,199 CX-7 cars were sold.

4. CX-9
> Make: Mazda

rollover-marginal; rear-marginal
> 2011 sales: 34,421
> Price: $29,725
> JD Power Initial Quality: 4/5

Assembled in Hiroshima, Japan, the Mazda CX-9 received “marginal” scores in both rollover and rear safety ratings. The CX-9 also had the lowest strength-to-weight ratio of all midsize SUVs tested by the IIHS. This ratio measures how much force a car’s roof can handle before it crushes five inches, and then it is divided by the weight of the car. Despite these poor ratings, the number of CX-9s sold increased from 25,484 in 2007 to 34,421 in 2011.

5. Pathfinder
> Make: Nissan

> Bad ratings: rollover-marginal; rear-marginal
> 2011 sales: 25,935
> Price: $29,290
> JD Power Initial Quality: 3/5

The Nissan Pathfinder earned “marginal” ratings in rollover and rear-impact testing from the IIHS. The Pathfinder’s performance in government rollover tests is likewise troubling, as it registered an estimated 20% to 30% risk of rolling over during testing. At a price of $29,290, the cost of a Pathfinder is similar to that of the Mazda CX-9 or the 4-door Jeep Wrangler. According to Edmunds sales figures, both these models have outsold the Pathfinder in the past three years.

6. Wrangler
> Make: Jeep

> Bad ratings: side-marginal (2-door), side-poor (4-door); rear-marginal (both)
> 2011 sales: 122,460 (all Wranglers), 46,803 (2-door), 75,657 (4-door)
> Price: $22,970 (2-door), $30,745 (4-door)
> JD Power Initial Quality: 3/5

With “marginal” ratings in side and rear-impact protection, the two-door Wrangler joins other SUVs, such as the CX-7, CX-9 and Pathfinder, as a poor performer in IIHS tests. One of the few car models that actually underperforms the two-door Jeep Wrangler is the larger four-door version. This version of the Wrangler also received a “marginal” rear-impact rating, yet was also given a “poor” side-impact rating. During a recent IIHS side-impact test, a dummy was struck by the steel bars supporting the four-door Wrangler’s convertible roof. Both of the models’ overall poor performance stems in part from the fact they were unable to protect the driver’s or back-seat passengers’ heads and other bodily parts in simulated accidents. Despite earning the lowest score of any mid-size SUV from Consumer Reports, the Wrangler still sells especially well with more than 120,000 sold in the U.S. in 2011.

7. SX4
> Make: Suzuki

> Bad ratings: rollover-marginal, rear-marginal
> 2011 sales: 12,520
> Price: $13,849
> JD Power Initial Quality: 2/5

The least-expensive car on this list, the Suzuki SX4 performed poorly in rollover and rear-test ratings. Among the more than 30 small cars tested by the IIHS, the SX4 was the only small car to receive two scores of “marginal” or “poor” out of four ratings. Similarly, the SX4 also received a “fair” rating, the second-lowest possible, in government side-crash testing. The model’s U.S. sales also have languished, falling from 30,166 in 2008 to 12,520 last year.


Read more: The Most Dangerous Cars in America - 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/2012/05/29/the-most-dangerous-cars-in-america/#ixzz1x7CbDhf9
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Here is a full list of vehicles that got the top safety pick designation:

Note there are many different categories. This is not to suggest a Honda Ridgeline that is put in the large pickup truck category
(as we know, it is hardly a truck at all) offers the same protection as a Volvo XC90, which is in a different grouping, or a Fiat 500
offers anywhere near the XC90 protection, for instance.


Minicars

Fiat 500 built after July 2011

Ford Fiesta sedan & hatchback

Honda Fit

Toyota Yaris 4-dr hatchback




Small cars

Chevrolet Cruze, Sonic, Volt

Ford Focus

Honda Civic sedan

Honda CR-Z, Insight

Hyundai Elantra

Kia Forte sedan

Kia Soul

Lexus CT 200h

Mazda 3 sedan & hatchback

Mini Cooper Countryman

Mitsubishi Lancer (except Ralliart & Evolution)

Nissan Cube, Juke, Leaf

Scion tC, xB, xD

Subaru Impreza except WRX

Toyota Corolla, Prius

Volkswagen Golf 4-dr

Volkswagen GTI 4-dr




Midsize moderately priced cars

Audi A3

Buick Verano

Chevrolet Malibu

Chrysler 200 4-dr

Dodge Avenger

Ford Fusion

Honda Accord

Hyundai Sonata

Kia Optima

Subaru Legacy, Outback

Toyota Camry, Prius v

Volkswagen Jetta sedan

Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen





Midsize luxury/near luxury cars

Acura TL built after Sept. 2011

Acura TSX sedan & wagon

Audi A4

Lincoln MKZ

Mercedes C-Class

Volkswagen CC except 4wd

Volvo S60






Large family cars

Buick LaCrosse, Regal

Chrysler 300

Dodge Charger

Ford Taurus

Toyota Avalon



Large luxury cars

Audi A6

BMW 5 series except 4wd & V8

Cadillac CTS sedan

Hyundai Equus

Infiniti M except M56x 4wd

Lincoln MKS

Mercedes E-Class sedan

Mercedes E-Class coupe

Saab 9-5

Volvo S80





Small SUVs

Honda CR-V

Hyundai Tucson

Jeep Patriot with optional side torso airbags

Kia Sportage

Subaru Forester

Volkswagen Tiguan



Midsize SUVs

Chevrolet Equinox

Dodge Durango, Journey

Ford Edge, Explorer, Flex

GMC Terrain

Honda Pilot

Hyundai Santa Fe

Jeep Grand Cherokee

Kia Sorento

Subaru Tribeca

Toyota Highlander, Venza





Midsize luxury SUVs

Acura MDX

Audi Q5

BMW X3

Cadillac SRX

Infiniti EX35

Lexus RX

Lincoln MKT, MKX

Mercedes GLK, M-Class

Saab 9-4X

Volvo XC60

Volvo XC90




Large SUVs

Buick Enclave

Chevrolet Traverse

GMC Acadia

Volkswagen Touareg



Minivans

Chrysler Town & Country

Dodge Grand Caravan

Honda Odyssey

Toyota Sienna

Volkswagen Routan






Large pickups

Ford F-150 crew cab

Honda Ridgeline

Toyota Tundra crew cab
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
Here is the test data for Volvo vehicles.
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?volvo

Here is more detail on the XC90
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=452



Here is the test data for everything else
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/default.aspx


Note there is a category where you can click to see "all cars" within a particular brand.
Here is an example of Chevrolet..............there is a heck of a lot of poor ratings in this one...............http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?chevrolet

Regards,

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
Search for this on YouTube for some interesting videos:

xc90 JRS Dynamic Rollover Test

Many newer vehicles don't so as well as the XC90. (And you'll never get in a
Honda Ridgeline after you see it's video).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I hear you about the Honda but it would be tough getting me in one of those anyway. I hear they have a bit of vibration in the steering wheel and the lump is a bit agricultural, lol

Best

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,176 Posts
An interesting point is that there are only two Lexus on the lists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
It is really a testament to the XC90's safety that it has remained on the Top Pick list for the past 7+ years. I really could not see myself owning a Asian car because of the safety incorporated into European cars (especially Volvos). I look at it this way: I would rather drive a car from a company who INVENTED crucial safety features, rather than a drive a car from a company who found out safety sells.

Oh and just clocked over 120,000 miles on our XC90!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
I guess not all Volvos are top picks. The following aren't on the list.

C30
C70
V50
XC70

So your point would be valid for some but not all Volvos. I guess Volvo make a few "poseurs" too the way you put it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,074 Posts
I guess not all Volvos are top picks. The following aren't on the list.

C30
C70
V50
XC70

So your point would be valid for some but not all Volvos. I guess Volvo make a few "poseurs" too the way you put it.
The C30 IS an IIHS top safety pick, the C70 was (until roof structure testing was done, which voided ALL convertibles from being top safety picks, but until that point only the C70 and Saab 9-3 convertible made that list), V50 is on its way out and the XC70 is the same platform and virtually identical underneath to the S80 which is a top safety pick...so why isnt the XC70 a top safety pick? THE IIHS NEVER TESTED IT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I guess not all Volvos are top picks. The following aren't on the list.

C30
C70
V50
XC70

So your point would be valid for some but not all Volvos. I guess Volvo make a few "poseurs" too the way you put it.


You apparently missed the C30 perfect score, http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=669
If they didn't test a car, it is not listed, therefore we can not see how poorly Jaguar did, for instance, becuause they didn't test one this round.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
You apparently missed the C30 perfect score, http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=669
If they didn't test a car, it is not listed, therefore we can not see how poorly Jaguar did, for instance, becuause they didn't test one this round.
My point is that you imply that if one drives anything but a Volvo, they may be compromising on safety whereas the list of top picks that you posted goes on to show that there are, in fact, cars from other manufacturers that are top picks too.

It's not like Volvo is the only manufacturer to have cracked the safety code. For e.g., many common place safety systems such as ABS, airbags, crumple zones, traction & stability control, brake assist, etc. are all Mercedes innovations. It's just that MB doesn't make a big fuss about it like Volvo's marketing does.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
No one can understand why Volvo drivers drive Volvos, until they crash into them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
We have Volvos and a Mercedes. We feel equally as safe in both of them. I just completed a school project on automotive safety, and Volvo was in most of it. Not on purpose but because they pioneer automotive safety.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #15 (Edited)
My point is that you imply that if one drives anything but a Volvo, they may be compromising on safety whereas the list of top picks that you posted goes on to show that there are, in fact, cars from other manufacturers that are top picks too.

It's not like Volvo is the only manufacturer to have cracked the safety code. For e.g., many common place safety systems such as ABS, airbags, crumple zones, traction & stability control, brake assist, etc. are all Mercedes innovations. It's just that MB doesn't make a big fuss about it like Volvo's marketing does.
I never said that Volvo was better than anyone else, I just said there are a lot of people out there driving cars that are NOT anywhere near as safe as a Volvo.

I offer the whole listing of cars that made the list, including those that didn't make the list. I am not implying anything, but I am SHOWING there is a lot cars out there on the highways that people unknowingly get into THINKING they are safe because their car LOOKS LIKE A VOLVO but sure is not a Volvo.

In case you have not seen the Mercedes rear crash analysis here it is, note there are several listing for MARGINAL safety, something you really don't see on Volvo testing, so yes, if you are driving something other than a Volvo, you are very likely to be driving something less safe, although there are many cars that have good ratings too, but Volvo trumps Mercedes when it comes to safety.

This is a XC90 forum, I don't see any test done on a XC90 that is cough, cough, MARGINAL.
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?mercedes

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/details_page.aspx?mercedes


VOLVO MAKES A BIG FUSS ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY CAN ! It is a big part of what made the company so famous, along with durability, good looks, good ergonomics, etc.


My advice to anyone with an Infinity, for instance, would be to sell it !
Here is why, they may LOOK SAFE.......but.........
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?infiniti


If you are going shopping, check this out, company wide all green!
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?volvo



regards,

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,959 Posts
Got to be careful when posting Mercedes safety propaganda on a Volvo enthusiast site.

_____________________________

Chuck Norris allows Volvo to do safety testing only because he allows other humans to exist on the planet with him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
I will say this, however. When the Mercedes was purchased my mother asked me if the MB was as safe as the Volvos we had.
Volvo doesn't just mean I roll. It also means "I'm safe"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Well it's pretty obvious some of us are rabid and partisan Volvo fans, but Mercedes builds very fine (and safe) cars. Please don't tell Chuck Norris I said that.

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
For e.g., many common place safety systems such as ABS, airbags, crumple zones, traction & stability control, brake assist, etc. are all Mercedes innovations. It's just that MB doesn't make a big fuss about it like Volvo's marketing does.
We have Volvos and a Mercedes. We feel equally as safe in both of them. I just completed a school project on automotive safety, and Volvo was in most of it. Not on purpose but because they pioneer automotive safety.
Having been a long time MB owner and enthusiast (I am OldMBGuy on the MB forums), I have always considered them to be very safe cars. They were definitely part of the safety-minded trio of manufacturers who are largely responsible for the majority of modern safety tech and practice (Saab, Volvo, MB), and they've held up well in the family accident history for years.

And they used to make a bit of a fuss about their safety standards, even going so far as to design whole marketing campaigns around them. Certainly most of their older era (prior to mid-1990s) cars were among the safest of their types on the road. All that being said, it would behoove the shopper to heed Mr. P's following advice (edited for hyperbole LOL!):

In case you have not seen the Mercedes rear crash analysis here it is, note there are several listing for MARGINAL safety, something you really don't see on Volvo testing, so yes, if you are driving something other than a Volvo, you are very likely to be driving something less safe, although there are many cars that have good ratings too, but Volvo trumps Mercedes when it comes to safety.
Every now and then, and with a higher frequency in the modern MB era (circa 1996 - present), DBAG will cut corners on safety only to fix the issues a few years later when they've been outed. The 1996-1999 w210 E-class and the 2006-2009 w251 R-class are two examples of this behavior where I have been caught following my old assumptions about MB safety when the reality was a little different. These safety "oversights" are generally representative of the new culture at DBAG, and are a large part of the reason that I will no longer be buying their cars (except for replacing older models which I have sold on and miss too much).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,959 Posts
Well it's pretty obvious some of us are rabid and partisan Volvo fans, but Mercedes builds very fine (and safe) cars. Please don't tell Chuck Norris I said that.

P
Agree with that--and every car company has their own propaganda consisting of truths and half-truths. And I try to be careful with all of my posts, lest I be cut to pieces too. But trying to say a car brand is as safe as a Volvo on a Volvo enthusiast site--well, you've got to be really careful with what you say. (And I won't tell Chuck.)
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top