crashtest Nuovo Crash Test IIHS: Small Overlap Crash (Urto molto disassato)

[ilmerovingio]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AleMcGir]

Cita

American muscle cars show range of performance in IIHS crash tests

RUCKERSVILLE, Va. — Think “muscle car” performance, and images of speed and power are more likely to come to mind than crash tests and safety ratings. Because no one buys a sports car to drive in the slow lane, the best all- around occupant crash protection is crucial. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) recently put a trio of iconic sports coupes through their paces, and unlike more sedate sedans, none earns the scores needed to clinch a TOP SAFETY PICK award.

IIHS evaluated 2016 models of the Chevrolet Camaro, Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang in the full battery of crashworthiness evaluations. The Mustang comes closest to earning TOP SAFETY PICK, while the Camaro falls short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system. The Challenger is most in need of improvement.

To qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK, vehicles must earn good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint evaluations and have a basic-rated front crash prevention system. To qualify for the Institute’s highest award, TOP SAFETY PICK+, vehicles must earn good ratings in the five crashworthiness tests and an advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.

IIHS doesn’t typically crash-test sports cars as they make up a small share of the consumer market. IIHS engineers decided to evaluate these models with optional V-8 engines because they are big sellers in their class, and consumers often ask how they would perform in crash tests.

Insurance data point to high losses for sports cars. As a group, they have the highest losses among passenger vehicles for crash damage repairs under collision coverage, data from the Highway Loss Data Institute show. Collision coverage insures against physical damage to the at-fault policyholder’s vehicle in a crash.

“Given that sports cars have high crash rates, it’s especially important that they offer the best occupant protection possible in a crash,” says Adrian Lund, IIHS president.

The Camaro, Challenger and Mustang all earn good ratings for occupant protection in a moderate overlap front crash and side impact. In the Institute’s newest and toughest crashworthiness evaluation, the small overlap front test, the Camaro earns a good rating, the Mustang earns acceptable, and the Challenger is rated marginal.

“The Mustang is just one good rating away from earning TOP SAFETY PICK,” Lund points out. “Its small overlap rating holds it back.”

Added in 2012, the small overlap test replicates what happens when a vehicle runs off the road and hits a tree or pole or clips another vehicle that has crossed the center line. In the test, 25 percent of the total width of the vehicle strikes 

the 5-foot-tall rigid barrier on the driver side at 40 mph. It is an especially challenging test because it involves a vehicle’s outer edges, which aren’t well-protected by the crush-zone structures. Crash forces go directly into the front wheel, suspension system and firewall.

The Challenger wasn’t up to the challenge of the small overlap test. Extensive intrusion into the lower occupant compartment limited survival space for the driver and resulted in a poor rating for structure and for leg/foot protection. Measures taken from the dummy indicate a high likelihood of serious lower leg injuries.

“During the crash, the Challenger’s front wheel was forced rearward into the occupant compartment, and the footwell intrusion trapped the dummy’s left foot and deformed its ankle,” Lund explains. “Our technicians had to unbolt the dummy’s foot from its leg in order to free it. Entrapment is pretty rare. That’s only happened five other times in a small overlap test.”

In contrast, survival space for the driver in the Camaro was well- maintained, and the risk of injuries to the dummy’s legs and feet was low. The Camaro was redesigned for the 2016 model year.

“The Camaro’s safety cage is built to resist intrusion in a small overlap crash, and that’s good news for Camaro drivers,” Lund says.

The Mustang’s structural performance in the small overlap test fell short of.over the Challenger. The roof buckled, and the driver’s survival space was compromised by considerable intrusion of the door hinge pillar and instrument panel. Still, measures taken from the dummy indicated low risk of injuries to all body regions, including the legs and feet.

The Camaro and Mustang earn good ratings for head restraints and seats to protect against neck injuries in rear crashes. The Challenger’s head restraints are rated acceptable.

The Mustang earns a good rating for roof strength, and the Camaro and Challenger earn acceptable. Stronger roofs crush less in rollover crashes, reducing the risk that people will be injured by contact with the roof itself and the risk that unbelted occupants will be ejected. Strong roofs are especially important for sports cars, which have among the highest driver death rates in single-vehicle rollovers.

Ford and Dodge offer optional forward collision warning systems on the Mustang and Challenger. Both coupes earn a basic rating for front crash prevention because their systems meet performance criteria set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

http://www.motor1.com/news/62945/iihs-crash-tests-show-muscle-cars-safety-issues/

 

.

Good:

.

Good

.

Marginal:

.

Acceptable:

.

Via https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ7rCjQe2LSyl9uT7A9Zr4g.

 

 

[Cosimo]

azz.. ma la mustang non si scassa decisamente più delle altre?

[mjdj147]

4 ore fa, Cosimo dice:

azz.. ma la mustang non si scassa decisamente più delle altre?

Si, quella piega sul montante non mi dice nulla di buono! C'è da dire che anche il ram rispetto agli altri pickup piega in maniera evidente il montante A...

[J-Gian]

Ho aggiunto i risultati prima dei video così da capire meglio, perché a volte a dispetto del comportamento della carrozzeria, dentro succede altro

 

Notare la differenza di comportamento della Challenger a seconda dell'offset (3° e 4° video)

[AleMcGir]

Overall evaluation: Good

Cita

New Chrysler minivan qualifies for top award from IIHS

ARLINGTON, Va. — The newly introduced Chrysler Pacifica is the first minivan to earn a 2016 Top Safety Pick+ award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

The minivan, which replaces the Chrysler Town & Country, has good ratings in the Institute's five crashworthiness tests. However, its good rating in the challenging small overlap front test applies only to Pacificas manufactured after August 2016, when changes were made to prevent the driver door from opening during a small overlap crash.

In the Pacifica's initial small overlap test, before those improvements were made, the door was torn from its hinges and came open at the front. Doors should never open in a crash because occupants could be ejected as a result.

Fiat Chrysler strengthened the upper hinge and reinforced the joint between the door hinge pillar and inner body panel in front of the pillar. In the second test, the door remained attached and closed, resulting in a good rating. In contrast, the Town & Country was rated poor for small overlap protection, due to severe intrusion into the driver space.

The Pacifica is available with an optional front crash prevention system, which earns a superior rating. In IIHS track tests at 25 mph and 12 mph, the vehicle avoided collisions. The system also gets credit for a forward collision warning component that meets National Highway Traffic Safety Administration criteria.

To qualify for a 2016 Top Safety Pick+ award, a vehicle must earn good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests. It also must have an available front crash prevention system that earns an advanced or superior rating.

 

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/desktopnews/new-chrysler-minivan-qualifies-for-top-award-from-iihs

Modificato 20 Settembre 2016 da AleMcGir

[J-Gian]

Accettabile, la Model S nell'urto disassato

 

 

[pennellotref]

Vi siete mai chiesti quale può essere l'incidenza, in termini di peso aggiuntivo, dello small over.....su una vettura ? L'Ing. Tracy di Jalopnik ci dà una risposta con l'ausilio di un capoccia Porsche confrontando il Cayenne corrente con quello di nuova generazione da poco presentato alla stampa.

 

http://jalopnik.com/the-2019-porsche-cayenne-added-110-pounds-specifically-1818573312

 

Cita

The 2019 Porsche Cayenne Added 110 Pounds Specifically For IIHS's Small Overlap Test

David Tracy

33 minutes ago

 

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s small overlap crash test is no joke. Vehicles that pass often include provisions specifically for the test, and those provisions add weight. How much? Well, according to Porsche’s SUV Body in White Team Leader Rudiger Jahn, 110 pounds in the case of the new Cayenne.

We all know that designing cars to pass ever-stricter crash tests means adding either cost or weight (or both). Exactly how much a specific crash test—particularly the most difficult one, the small overlap test (which involves a vehicle crashing only one quarter of its frontal width into a barrier)—adds in weight has been a mystery to me. So to actually get a figure is something I found rather interesting. One hundred ten pounds is a significant figure, even for an SUV. That’s like having an overweight golden retriever in your car at all times.

 

At a press event near Duesseldorf, Jahn walked me around the new 2019 Cayenne to show which provisions had to be added for the small overlap crash test. The first, he told me, was steel bolstering in the wheel well to reduce intrusion into the driver’s footwell:

 

The second provision was a diagonal member that ties that bolstered wheel well structure into a central longitudinal beam. The idea is that the energy from the crash that pushes the inside of the wheel well will be transferred through that diagonal member, into the strong longitudinal beam, reducing intrusion:

 

In addition to the provisions on the body, Jahn also said the front subframe was designed in such a way that it precisely orients the wheel during a crash to help minimize intrusion into the cabin. If you look at the vehicles that pass IIHS’s rigorous test, you’ll notice that they all turn the driver’s side wheel in a particular way; here’s an example showing the 2018 Volkswagen Atlas:

So yes, the small overlap crash test added 110 pounds to the new Cayenne. But that just meant Jahn and his team at Porsche had to find clever ways to cut weight elsewhere, and they succeeded—the new Cayenne weighs up to 143 pounds less than its predecessor thanks to a body made largely of aluminum. (I’ll delve further into the nerdiness that went into that in a subsequent article).

 

I reachee out to IIHS to learn more about how their small overlap test affects vehicle weight, and their representative told me:

“When we’ve looked at weight changes, we haven’t seen a consistent pattern...The 2014 Nissan Rogue, for example, improved to good in the small overlap test compared with the 2013 model’s marginal rating. However, the 2014 model was a redesign and the vehicle got a little larger. We don’t know how much of that weight increase had to do with changes for the small overlap test. Other vehicles with improved performance lost weight. Manufacturers that integrated structural improvements into new designs were less likely to have weight increases compared to those that decided to make “band-aid” changes with add-on parts that can be bulky and require additional assembly.”

Here’s a slide showing how much weight some car models gained and lost between generations that weren’t designed for the small overlap crash, and those that were:

 

 

Modificato 20 Settembre 2017 da pennellotref

[J-Gian]

Direi siano 50 kg ben voluti, in questo caso.

 

Che poi - a parer mio - il test nuovo è anche un pretesto per giustificare aumenti di peso dovuti al salto generazionale... 

[pennellotref]

39 minuti fa, J-Gian dice:

Direi siano 50 kg ben voluti, in questo caso.

 

Che poi - a parer mio - il test nuovo è anche un pretesto per giustificare aumenti di peso dovuti al salto generazionale... 

Nel caso di Porsche, l'Ing. tedesco sostiene che abbiano recuperato in altro modo e con gli interessi il golden retriever di cui sopra